Podcasts about Supreme court

Is Trump losing control of everything? That's the through-line this week as the system starts pushing back on multiple fronts at once. Paul Rieckhoff breaks down Thomas Massie's articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth — a Pentagon leader more obsessed with grooming standards and fitness optics than with getting the job done in Iran or telling Congress the truth. Inside the building, morale is cratering and the leaks are coming from senior officers who want him out. Meanwhile, Kevin Warsh — the man Trump handpicked to replace Jerome Powell and slash rates — did the opposite. He hiked. Because inflation is real, the bond market doesn't lie, and even a Trump loyalist has to answer to Economics 101. From there the show pivots to Ukraine's record defense budget and the long-overdue Graham sanctions bill, the Iran war that's become a sucking chest wound for the military and the economy, and the cultural collision that is Ed Sheeran, Macklemore, Bob Kraft, and the free-Palestine chant that split a New Jersey stadium in half. This is the no-BS, intelligence-grade read on a week where the Fed, the Supreme Court, Congress, and the Pentagon all told the president no — and where the most desperate move may still be coming. If you want to understand what actually happened this week without a partisan filter, this is your briefing. -WATCH full video of this episode here. -Millions of American veterans are being locked out of primary elections in the country they served. See what we're doing to change that. -Visit Kalshi and trade on anything. Use code INDEPENDENT to get $25 when you trade $25. -Head to cozyearth.com and use the code AMERICANS for an exclusive 20% off. -Join Noble Mobile today and get a $100 bonus when you use code PAUL and stay a member for 2 months! -Join IVA and help us get independent veterans elected to office. -Learn more about Paul's work to elect a new generation of independent leaders with Independent Veterans of America. -Learn more about American Veterans for Ukraine here. -Remember Independent is an Attitude. -Learn more about The Headstrong Project for Veterans, Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS), and Department of Veterans Affairs resources in your area. Seeking support is not a sign of weakness. It's a show of strength. If you or a loved one are in immediate crisis, dial 988 and press 1, or text 838255. Connect with Independent Americans: Subscribe on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and all podcast platforms Read more at Substack Support ad-free episodes at Patreon  Connect: Instagram  • X/Twitter • BlueSky • Facebook  Follow on social: @PaulRieckhoff on X, Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky -Join the movement. Hook into our exclusive Patreon community of Independent Americans. Get extra content, connect with guests, meet other Independent Americans, attend events, get merch discounts, and support this show that speaks truth to power.  -And get cool IA and Righteous hats, t-shirts and other merch now in time for the new year.  Independent Americans is powered by veteran-owned and led Righteous Media.  And now part of the BLEAV network!  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Eight weeks out from the midterms, Republican strategist Matt Wylie says his own party is in serious trouble. The Fed defied Trump, the courts blocked him twice, and House Republicans went home for six weeks rather than take a vote. And all the polling is getting worse for the GOP.This week on Political Rehab, our mashup of PTI and The Daily Show: Kevin Warsh — Trump's handpicked Fed chair — led a unanimous quarter-point rate hike, the first increase in three years, after Trump spent a year demanding cuts. A federal judge blocked Trump's name from the Kennedy Center and the Supreme Court blocked his mail-in voting restrictions for November. Speaker Mike Johnson canceled votes and sent the House home ahead of a privileged resolution to impeach Pete Hegseth. The AI safety fight exploded and then died. Saudi Arabia shut down its East-West pipeline and gas prices jumped.Plus Battlefield: why Republicans are suddenly spending $72 million in Texas, what Ashley Hinson's bipartisanship ad tells you about Iowa, and the clearest Democratic week in the polling averages since we started this segment.CHAPTERS0:00 — Cold open: a very good week for Democrats1:00 — The Fed raises rates and defies Trump3:00 — Why "inflation expectations are anchored" is a message, not a finding4:00 — Trump loses twice in court: the Kennedy Center and mail-in voting6:00 — Alito parrots the cover story7:00 — Johnson cancels votes and sends the House home9:00 — The AI threat hits Congress and goes nowhere12:00 — The Saudi squeeze: the pipeline, gas and diesel15:00 — Battlefield: something is happening in Iowa18:00 — Battlefield: Republicans are panicking about Texas20:00 — Generic ballot, consumer sentiment, Trump approval24:00 — Dose of Hope: fall is back and so is campaign season27:00 — The Kash Patel hearingRead Worth Knowing with Matt Robison: https://worthknowing.substack.comSubscribe: https://worthknowing.substack.com/subscribe#Midterms2026 #Trump #Republicans #PoliticalRehab #FederalReserve #MikeJohnson #SupremeCourt #Texas #Iowa #GenericBallot #KashPatel #AIRegulation #WorthKnowing #Politics #Election2026

This week on the Mark Levin Show, the Declaration of Independence is the clearest statement of America's founding principles. The United States was uniquely founded on a fusion of Judeo-Christian values and Enlightenment principles, combining faith, morality, reason, and natural rights while rejecting theocracy. America's founding principles allow individuals to hold diverse beliefs, including atheism and agnosticism, while preserving freedom of thought and religion. Islamism and Marxism are incompatible with American founding ideals because they reject natural law, natural rights, and the reasoning embodied in the Declaration of Independence. Remember all the fearmongering over things like DDT, e-oli, gas lawn mowers, and masks during COVID? Remember when climate change was supposed to cause sea levels to rise? There's a new fearmongering op over AI and data centers, driven by the Communist Chinese and their Democrat cheerleaders like Bernie Sanders. All the lies about data centers -- they use too much water, will cause electricity costs to go up, will kill jobs -- have all been proven false. But Barack Obama and others want to either kill this new industry or want the government to take it over. Bernie Sanders even said AI is more dangerous than nukes! Don't be a sucker. Don't give in to fearmongering. We need this new technology, and America must win the AI race. Republicans have abandoned their focus on affordability and instead shifted their attention to opposing or regulating data centers; they're chasing the latest political issue rather than addressing real concerns. Republicans are allowing Democrats and the media to shape their agenda, affordability remains a major problem and should be a priority. Groundbreaking developments should be left free from government interference because bureaucrats and politicians lack the expertise to direct innovation. Calls for greater regulation are driven by a desire for power and control rather than practical solutions. We need deregulation, limited government involvement, and allowing innovation and technological development to proceed with minimal restrictions. Later, re you getting sick and tired of ingrates who have no connection to this country? Take Hasan Piker: born here, raised in Turkey where he was radicalized, and thanks to the Supreme Court, returned here a citizen. Democrats might be keeping Piker at arm's length, but he is the face of the party. Democrats have embraced radical Islamism and Marxism just like they embraced slavery and segregation in the past. Islamism and Marxism are incompatible with the Judeo-Christian values of America and the Constitution. Most outrageously, Piker says, pound-for-pound, America causes more terrorism than Al-Qaeda. America is turning into Europe, which is dead and doesn't have the will to survive. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

You've seen the headlines about the lists, the claims, the THREE times this same executive order about voting by mail has gone to the Supreme Court. But is Trump's interference with mail-in voting settled—at least with respect to the midterms? Our go-to election law expert, Richard Hasen of UCLA School of Law, joins Dahlia to unpack what just happened and how this postal chaos alters voters' sense of election security. We're calling this discussion “information” and not “catastrophizing.” Hasen has this advice for listeners: get out there and vote in-person. Next, Sam Sankar of the environmental-law organization Earthjustice explains why SCOTUS' longstanding skepticism towards the environment does not make him as pessimistic as one might expect. He also takes us behind the scenes in two environmental cases that will kick off the Supreme Court term in a few weeks, including an appeal over whether the Air Force may continue to blow stuff up over an historic beach in Guam.Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll 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.

You've seen the headlines about the lists, the claims, the THREE times this same executive order about voting by mail has gone to the Supreme Court. But is Trump's interference with mail-in voting settled—at least with respect to the midterms? Our go-to election law expert, Richard Hasen of UCLA School of Law, joins Dahlia to unpack what just happened and how this postal chaos alters voters' sense of election security. We're calling this discussion “information” and not “catastrophizing.” Hasen has this advice for listeners: get out there and vote in-person. Next, Sam Sankar of the environmental-law organization Earthjustice explains why SCOTUS' longstanding skepticism towards the environment does not make him as pessimistic as one might expect. He also takes us behind the scenes in two environmental cases that will kick off the Supreme Court term in a few weeks, including an appeal over whether the Air Force may continue to blow stuff up over an historic beach in Guam.Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll 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.

You've seen the headlines about the lists, the claims, the THREE times this same executive order about voting by mail has gone to the Supreme Court. But is Trump's interference with mail-in voting settled—at least with respect to the midterms? Our go-to election law expert, Richard Hasen of UCLA School of Law, joins Dahlia to unpack what just happened and how this postal chaos alters voters' sense of election security. We're calling this discussion “information” and not “catastrophizing.” Hasen has this advice for listeners: get out there and vote in-person. Next, Sam Sankar of the environmental-law organization Earthjustice explains why SCOTUS' longstanding skepticism towards the environment does not make him as pessimistic as one might expect. He also takes us behind the scenes in two environmental cases that will kick off the Supreme Court term in a few weeks, including an appeal over whether the Air Force may continue to blow stuff up over an historic beach in Guam.Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll 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.

Be protected if you ever have to defend yourself or family, JOIN CCW Safe TODAY! https://lawofselfdefense.com/ccwsafeMichael Desronvil, the hero juror who prevented the acquittal of first degree murder mommy Lindsay Clancy who strangled her three children to death after sending her husband on an errand, has lawyered up!And WHAT a lawyer!  Desronvil has retained none other than Edward Paltzik.If you're not familiar with Paltzik, you soon will be—and you really already should have been.  This same lawyer is currently suing both Sunny Hostin and Al Sharpton over their defamation of three young men in the accidental boating death of Nolan Wells—and his letters to each of them are hilarious reading!Paltzik also wrote an exceptionally compelling amicus brief for the Supreme Court decision of Bruen—the seminal SCOTUS second Amendment decision authored by the great and powerful Justice Clarence Thomas.  He's also been outside counsel for many years to the Second Amendment Foundation, a champion in fighting for our run rights, and an organization in which I've personally long been a life member.It also worth mentioning that he's previously represented none other than Donald Trump himself—so you know he's not some loony Leftie. Join me LIVE at Noon ET as I break it all down!Make sure you're ready to win the LEGAL FIGHT that follows the PHYSICAL FIGHT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself or your family from criminal predation. Learn why I am PERSONALLY a member of CCW SAFE, and why YOU SHOULD CONSIDER JOINING, TOO:  https://lawofselfdefense.com/ccwsafeAll @TheBrancaShow mugs & MORE! 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/3f7pc8nzEpisode #1453.

This week on Hafta, Abhinandan Sekhri, Manisha Pande and Rinchen Norbu are joined by Anupam Manur, Professor of Economics at the Takshashila Institution, and Mihira Sood, Supreme Court lawyer specialising in women's rights.The panel opens the discussion by examining the government's decision to introduce a 0.4% fee on UPI merchant transactions above Rs 2,000, asking what the move means for a payment system that has become central to everyday transactions in India.Anupam Manur acknowledges that UPI generates wider economic benefits, but argues that the current model also creates a problem: who ultimately bears the cost of running the system? He explains that the cost of operating UPI is substantial, while the government subsidises only a portion of it.Manur says, “When UPI came about, India was miles ahead of the world in some sense. It was truly revolutionary.” But he argues that the costs leave new entrants with insufficient incentive, which has affected private-sector innovation. “Private players are just not incentivized to innovate.”The discussion then moves from the economics of UPI to the politics of its messaging. Abhinandan argues that the government has often reduced complicated policy questions to easily marketable slogans: “I think the problem is, like many things that Mr. Modi does ever since he's come, let's count his slogans. He's a fantastic ad man.”The panel then turns to the BJP's push for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC).Mihira offers a qualified position. She makes clear that she supports the idea of a UCC in principle, particularly as a route towards greater equality.But she distinguishes that principle from the particular version being discussed. She says, “What I have a problem with is this particular type of Uniform Civil Code because it is not based in secularism and it is not based in feminism.”Rinchen questions whether we should even call this a ‘uniform civil code', given the carve-outs that exist for Scheduled Tribes in states like Uttarakhand, where the BJP has implemented its version of it.He also argues that the focus on polygamy in the UCC debate distracts from the larger issue of inheritance rights for women. “This whole bigamy, this whole polygamy thing is a red herring, it's overstated,” he adds, while Mihira breaks down the real legal questions surrounding inheritance if the BJP actually cared about women's rights.Timecodes00:00:00 – Introduction00:07:03 – Headlines00:12:01 – MDR on UPI 00:44:03 – Anupam's Recommendations00:48:32 – Manisha on Brazil politics 00:55:32 – UCC 01:25:52 – Mihira's Recommendations01:28:32 – Letters01:46:08 – Recommendations Check out previous Hafta recommendations, references, songs and letters.Produced by Amit Pandey with production assistance from Saurav Kr. Ranjan & Sound by Anil Kumar. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A federal judge told President Trump he cannot demolish the Kennedy Center without 30 days' notice, after the board shut the building and Trump threatened to rip it down if his name is not on it.The president has taken a series of hits this week, from the Supreme Court blocking his mail-in voting plan to the Fed increasing interest rates against his wishes, raising questions about how much institutions are willing to push back as the midterms approach.Poland's prime minister says Russia is planning hybrid drone and missile attacks on European countries that support Ukraine, strikes Moscow would try to pass off as accidents to keep NATO from responding.Want more analysis of the most important news of the day, plus a little fun? Subscribe to the Up First newsletter.Support public media with NPR+ and enjoy perks for over 25 podcasts like this one. This show's perks include sponsor-free listening. Learn more at plus.npr.org.Today's episode of Up First was edited by Steve Drummond, Rebekah Metzler, Tina Kraja, Mohamad ElBardicy and Alice Woelfle.It was produced by Ziad Buchh and Nia Dumas.Our director is Christopher Thomas.We get engineering support from Zac Coleman.Our technical director is Carleigh Strange.And our Executive Producer is Jay Shaylor.(0:00) Introduction(01:51) Kennedy Center Demolition Threat(05:44) Trump's Troubles(09:15) Poland Warns Of Russian AttacksSee 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

On Thursday's Mark Levin Show, are you getting sick and tired of ingrates who have no connection to this country? Take Hasan Piker: born here, raised in Turkey where he was radicalized, and thanks to the Supreme Court, returned here as a citizen. Democrats might be keeping Piker at arm's length, but he is the face of the party. Democrats have embraced radical Islamism and Marxism just like they embraced slavery and segregation in the past. Islamism and Marxism are incompatible with the Judeo-Christian values of America and the Constitution. Most outrageously, Piker says, pound-for-pound, America causes more terrorism than Al-Qaeda. America is turning into Europe, which is dead and doesn't have the will to survive. Later, Bruce Blakeman calls in with an update on the NY Gubernatorial race. Blakeman says that his campaign is in a statistical dead heat, with polling showing him only 3.9% behind in a blue state. New York is facing economic decline, with population, business, and job losses, and warns that continued leadership by Kathy Hochul and Zohran Mamdani would further harm the state. Voters are increasingly recognizing the need for change and policies focused on job creation, economic growth, tax and regulation cuts, lower utility costs, and restoring law and order. Also, many members of Congress lack expertise in AI and data centers yet seek to regulate them. AI development is a competitive race that the United States must win. Any regulation would hinder innovation while allowing other countries to advance. If these doomer-Luddite politicians have their way, the new medicines and technologies resulting from AI data centers that are going to save lives, improve the quality of life, and increase the standard of living for untold numbers of people, would not happen.  They are literally trying to cripple these industries and these businesses, and they are also actively helping the Communist Chinese leapfrog our companies and our country.  Afterward, if the Democrats had their way, they would remove President Trump, Secretary of War Hegseth and Secretary of Education McMahon via impeachment. In other words, they would undertake a coup since impeachment is not intended for the purposes they intend to use it. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week the nation woke up to the potential danger of runaway tech — that AI is behaving in ways its creators don't intend and can't control. And that we might be as little as six months to a year away from AI being capable of acting on its own.The midterm election is coming. Prices are high. And a new Congressional Budget Office report out this week says the main reason for relentless inflation is the Iran war.And President Donald Trump has made mail-in-voting a major part of his campaign to sow doubt in the voting process. But on Monday, the Supreme Court blocked his executive order to change how mail-in ballots are sent to voters across the country.And, in global news, this week, Yemeni Houthis militia members seized the Red Sea port of Mokha and several islands inside the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, a key shipping passage.Reporting from The Washington Post revealed the details of a $2.8 billion arms package the Trump administration will send to Israel. The sale includes 2,000-pound bombs, the largest single sale of the controversial munition in recent years.And next week, is the U.N. General Assembly will stage its annual meeting in New York.Then, Chinese President Xi Jinping heads to Washington for a much-anticipated meeting with President Donald Trump.We cover the most important stories from around the world in the News Roundup.Find more of our programs online. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.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

The last week has been dominated by dire warnings about the threat AI could pose to humanity. A growing number of voices in government are calling for action. Even leaders in the industry say things need to slow down. But some like President Trump say there's great risk in regulating – we could fall behind and let countries like China lead the way. We'll talk about if and how to regulate an industry growing at an unimaginable pace.We'll also discuss the trust in our elections. The president is casting doubts, though his effort to restrict mail in voting was knocked down by the Supreme Court. But if his party loses and he questions the results, what's next? Plus we take questions from our live audience at the College of William & Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia.Producer: Leo DuranHost: David Greene Guests:  Mike Dubke, veteran GOP communications strategist and advisor. He was the White House Comms Director under Donald Trump in 2017 - @MikeDubke Mo Elleithee, executive director at Georgetown University's Institute of Politics and Public Service - @MoElleithee

CAPTION 1868 FROM THE EARTH TO THE MOON, JULES VERNE.CONTENTS -JOHN-BATCHELOR-SHOW-9-17-2026 Foreign Conflicts Escalate Global Energy CrisisAnatol Lieven and Jonathan Guyer, co-authors of the report The Iran Trap, discuss interconnected conflicts in Ukraine, Iran, and Yemen threatening critical global energy infrastructure and driving up global diesel costs. Houthis disrupt Red Sea maritime routes while damaged Russian oil refineries reduce worldwide fuel exports. Public polling conducted by the Institute for Global Affairs reveals dropping support for foreign military interventions as four in five Americans connect overseas wars to rising living costs. Their report underscores public fatigue over escalating militarism and growing anxiety regarding unmonitored military artificial intelligence applications. The analysts argue that restoring diplomatic dialogue with China and reasserting congressional war powers remain essential steps toward resolving these compounding geopolitical crises. (1)Supreme Court Rejects Postal Voting RegulationRichard Epstein discusses the Supreme Court's refusal to permit the U.S. Postal Service to implement new mail-in voting regulations ahead of federal elections. Justice Kavanaugh concurred, emphasizing that election administrators lack sufficient time and software systems to process millions of mail-in ballots without causing severe delays. Epstein criticizes the rule as an insidious abuse of government monopoly power, comparing selective ballot inspection to an unconstitutional poll tax. Epstein asserts that presidential efforts to bypass Congress and override state voting authorities breach constitutional separation of powers and fiduciary obligations owed to the public. (2)Brazilian Election Scandal Shakes Supreme CourtMary Anastasia O'Grady reports Brazil's presidential campaign between incumbent Lula da Silva and Flavio Bolsonaro has tightened significantly amidst mounting financial and judicial scandals. Flavio Bolsonaro initially suffered in polling after soliciting movie funding from jailed banker Daniel Vorcaro of collapsed Banco Master. However, police investigations revealed text messages from Vorcaro seeking advice from Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, whose wife received a $25 million contract with Banco Master. Moraes previously led efforts to vacate Lula's conviction and silence political opponents. Exposure of judicial influence peddling leaves conflicted voters facing a critical October runoff. (3)Early Solar System Magnetism Shaped PlanetsCauê Borlina and David Livingston: Purdue Professor Borlina analyzed pristine Antarctic meteorites, notably DOM 08006, to investigate the early solar system's magnetic history. By studying calcium-aluminum-rich inclusions (CAIs)—the oldest known solids formed 4.5 billion years ago—researchers discovered preserved primordial magnetism locked within iron-nickel minerals as they cooled below their Curie temperature. Measurements revealed ancient magnetic field strengths between 150 and 600 microteslas, exceeding Earth's current field strength. This confirms that magnetic forces worked in tandem with gravity to ionize gas and transport nebula mass. Borlina advocates for extensive future sample return missions across asteroids and Mars. (4)Grim Human Reality Of Hiroshima BombingCharles Pellegrino, author of Ghosts of Hiroshima, explores the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, detailing military logistics and human tragedy. Radar engineer Jacob Beser helped calibrate the detonation altitude, while Enola Gay pilot Paul Tibbets performed a sharp escape maneuver to avoid the explosion. On the ground, intense thermal radiation disintegrated citizens instantly or flash-fossilized human bodies at temperatures vastly higher than volcanic eruptions. Pellegrino details survivors like Kenshi Hirata and Tsutomu Yamaguchi, who astonishingly survived both Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. The account illuminates horrific phenomena such as shadow people, shock cocoons, and fatal radiation sickness in children. (5)Latin American Political Instability And SecurityEvan Ellis assesses complex geopolitical shifts across Latin America. In Venezuela, opposition leader María Corina Machado struggles to return home as the U.S. navigates high-stakes oil deals alongside interim leaders Delcy and Jorge Rodríguez. Meanwhile, non-traditional U.S. counter-narcotics reporting reflects shifting diplomatic relations with Colombia and Venezuela. In Brazil, a close presidential election between Flavio Bolsonaro and Lula da Silva highlights deep polarization, judicial corruption controversies, and competing U.S.-China strategic interests. Additionally, Argentine President Javier Milei leverages historical Falkland Islands sovereignty claims to navigate domestic economic pressures and international political dynamics. (6)

This is a preview of The Weekender. Sign up for our Patreon and get access to the full episode each Friday as well as special Live Shows and access to our community discord: http://patreon.com/muckrakepodcast Co-hosts Jared Yates Sexton and Nick Hauselman open on Kevin Warsh raising interest rates when Trump appointed him to cut them, and why a rate hike can't do a thing about: record diesel prices, the war in Iran, or an economy already flirting with stagflation (not necessarily in that order). The Supreme Court keeps the Postal Service's mail ballot rule on hold through the midterms, with Thomas and Alito still on board (because of course) and a whistleblower alleging the USPS built the system anyway. Jared predicts November is headed for a mess no matter what the courts say. Speaking of a mess, Mitch McConnell returned to the Senate looking a lot like Grandpa at the dinner table in The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, which Jared and Nick see as proof of a machine that grinds the humanity out of everyone who serves it. A new report that JD Vance tried to advise the Clinton campaign in 2016 shows exactly who he is: a striver (on a couch) with no principles who could just as easily have ended up a Democrat, and Hillary's own 9/11 essay in The Atlantic proves the striver class is bipartisan (good times). In What We're Watching, Nick catches The Odyssey a second time to get ready for his trip, and Jared is slowly working through For Whom the Bell Tolls and finally watched season one of The Rehearsal. Nick is off to Greece for two weeks, so Jared will hold down the fort until he's back in October.

If you've been in the development game for more than five minutes, you know the scenario. You find a parcel. You spend eighteen months and hundreds of thousands of dollars on environmental studies, traffic impact analyses, civil engineering, and public hearings. You work tirelessly with the city planning staff, you follow the local comprehensive plan to the letter, and finally—finally—the city council approves your Planned Unit Development, or PUD.You pop the champagne. You start pulling permits.And then, two weeks later, you get the notice. A group of local activists who don't want seeing new construction near their backyards have organized a petition drive. They've gathered enough signatures to trigger a public referendum to overturn your project's zoning approval on the next municipal ballot.Suddenly, your multi-million-dollar project, your capital stack, and your entire timeline are held hostage by a local popularity contest.Here's what happened. A project involved a site-specific Planned Unit Development in Telluride, Colorado. The land was designated for a specific site plan, including an element aimed at addressing local workforce housing—a major need in mountain resort communities.When the local authority moved forward with approving the site-specific modifications to the PUD agreement, opponents organized a petition drive. They sought to use direct democracy—a citizen referendum—to amend or repeal the PUD agreement directly on the ballot.The case went all the way to the state Supreme Court. And the Court came back with a decisive, unanimous answer: No. You cannot use a ballot initiative or public referendum to overturn an administrative land-use approval.-----------**Real Estate Espresso Podcast:** Spotify: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](https://open.spotify.com/show/3GvtwRmTq4r3es8cbw8jW0?si=c75ea506a6694ef1)   iTunes: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-real-estate-espresso-podcast/id1340482613)   Website: [www.victorjm.com](http://www.victorjm.com)   LinkedIn: [Victor Menasce](http://www.linkedin.com/in/vmenasce)   YouTube: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](http://www.youtube.com/@victorjmenasce6734)   Facebook: [www.facebook.com/realestateespresso](http://www.facebook.com/realestateespresso)   Email: [podcast@victorjm.com](mailto:podcast@victorjm.com)  **Y Street Capital:** Website: [www.ystreetcapital.com](http://www.ystreetcapital.com)   Facebook: [www.facebook.com/YStreetCapital](https://www.facebook.com/YStreetCapital)   Instagram: [@ystreetcapital](http://www.instagram.com/ystreetcapital)  

Europe and Canada pursue realignment with new security architecture amid escalating inter-imperialist rivalries / 58 Democrats join House vote to grant Trump additional war and tariff powers / Trump lashes out after Supreme Court blocks mail-in ballot rules

A Hennepin County judge set bail at $200,000 for an ICE agent accused of shooting and wounding a Venezuelan man in January. Early and absentee voting for November's midterm election starts Friday in Minnesota, just days after the Supreme Court blocked efforts by the Trump administration to curtail mail-in voting.A Minneapolis man has been sentenced to 14 months in prison for spraying vinegar on DFL Congresswoman Ilhan Omar earlier this year.After two seasons of much anticipation, Minnesota fans will get a visit from the 3-on-3 women's basketball league Unrivaled in 2027. The league will make a tour stop in Minneapolis next year.

The Missouri Supreme Court made a number of precedent-setting decisions this year when it comes to congressional redistricting. And they've also held the state's GOP secretary of state in contempt for disobeying one of their rulings. These actions have prompted blowback from Missouri Republicans, including more than a dozen who called for impeachment hearings for Supreme Court judges. Former Missouri Supreme Court Judge Michael Wolff discusses whether these threats are just talk or a sign that Republicans may want to target a plan that selects key judges in the state.

The Washington Stand's Casey Harper discusses the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to block the U.S. Postmaster from advancing a computer system to reduce mail-in-ballot fraud, the opening of Virginia's absentee voting season, and the delay in the

There's only one seat on the N.C. Supreme Court on this November's ballot, and while the outcome won't change the partisan makeup of the state's highest court, it could help determine whether Democrats have a shot at retaking the court majority in 2028. Justice Anita Earls, a Democrat seeking a second eight-year term, faces Republican Sarah Stevens, who recently stepped down from the N.C. House after 17 years in the legislature, including several terms as speaker pro tem. The two candidates have differing views on the appropriate role of the court and recent moves by the court's GOP majority to overturn past decisions on voter ID, redistricting and education funding. Earls and Stevens each spoke to WUNC News' Colin Campbell about the race, the issues and their legal backgrounds.

In this episode, we kick things off by examining Tesla's ambitious push into the European freight market as the electric vehicle giant ⁠targets late-2027 customer deliveries for the Semi⁠ after demonstrations begin in the first half of that year. The first European trucks will roll off the Reno, Nevada production line, which is designed for fifty thousand units annually, and will feature a 342-mile usable range with the ability to recover more than sixty percent of range in just thirty minutes using Tesla's new Megacharger network of over one hundred stalls across Europe. Shifting gears to the rails, we examine how Norfolk Southern is positioning its proposed combination with Union Pacific as a transformative step for intermodal freight. According to the railroad's leadership, ⁠the proposed mega-merger is central to removing structural friction from the freight network⁠ by creating single-line service for roughly ten thousand existing lanes and eliminating approximately 2,400 railcar handlings and 60,000 car-miles per day. With Norfolk Southern's intermodal volume already up nearly fourteen percent year-over-year, the railroad argues that removing friction rather than simply undercutting truck prices is the key to capturing highway freight. Finally, we cover a critical new resource for freight brokers navigating heightened liability in the wake of a recent Supreme Court ruling. Cambridge Mobile Telematics has ⁠officially launched Freight Safety Intelligence, a platform that analyzes carrier driving behavior⁠ from the previous ninety days and generates real-time carrier-level safety scores. The platform leverages data from carriers' existing telematics systems without requiring new hardware, and it arrives at a crucial moment as brokers face increased exposure to negligent-selection claims following the Supreme Court's ruling in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II. ⁠Follow the FreightWaves Today Podcast⁠ ⁠Other FreightWaves Shows⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

President Donald Trump on Friday announced bans on three major news organizations from the White House over what he called fake reporting, adding that more media outlets will follow.The president signed an executive order to expand Medicaid drug price discounts. All 50 states will have access to most-favored-nation pricing for certain drugs through Medicaid programs.The U.S. Postal Service is pausing the development of a mail-in voting computer system. It comes after the Supreme Court blocked Trump's rules for how the USPS should handle mail ballots.

In today's DMN Morning Debrief: Billions in Medicaid funding are restored to Texas hospitals, Cindy Clemishire takes her Gateway Church lawsuit to the state's Supreme Court, and Big Tex is ready to rise at Fair Park. Plus, tell us which State Fair foods are on your must-try list. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michaela Estruth discusses Vice President J.D. Vance's visit to Kansas City, where Operation Heartland Surge announced $245 million in recovered theft, charges against more than 80 people, and the suspension of 870,000 alleged PPP borrowers. Vance, Attorney General Todd Blanche, and FBI Director Kash Patel said the work now extends to Medicaid, including claims that hospitals hid banned procedures for minors under other billing codes. Estruth asked Vance how to lock anti-fraud work into lasting law and whether Medicaid cases are on the list. He said the task force is looking, invited Democrats to join, and warned thieves that the way to get rich should be building something, not stealing from taxpayers. The episode also covers the Supreme Court blocking Trump's mail-in ballot rules, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin's Houston message that climate alarm is being used to scare the public, Texas's new classical social-studies standards, and Nashville teachers who say they were pressured to change grades. After the break: Washington parents asking the Court to stop a runaway-shelter law, a Massachusetts family fighting state custody, and an Idaho bathroom-law settlement that paid a female student $34,000.00:00:00 – Introduction00:00:44 – Court Blocks Ballot Order00:03:17 – G20 Energy in Houston00:04:45 – Zeldin on Climate Rhetoric00:06:38 – Texas History Standards00:07:12 – Nashville Grade Pressure00:09:06 – Vance Fraud Task Force00:11:19 – Estruth Questions Vance00:14:27 – Making Fraud Laws Last00:18:38 – Washington Shelter Law00:21:05 – Massachusetts Custody Fight00:23:00 – Idaho Bathroom Settlement Follow Heartlander News on Facebook, Instagram, X, and YouTube.  You can also sign-up for our newsletter and follow our coverage at HeartlanderNews.com.To learn more about the Herzog Foundation, visit HerzogFoundation.com. Like and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram, or sign up to receive monthly email updates.#ChristianEducation #Education #EducationPolicy #EducationReform #FaithAndLearning #Family #FaithInEducation #Faith #Homeschool #ChristianSchool #PrivateSchool #EducationNews #News #Religion #ReligiousNews #PublicSchool #SchoolNews #NewsShow #SchoolChoice 

This episode features Bill Cox, Director of Public Defense Improvement, and Kristin Meeks, Senior Policy Analyst with the Texas Indigent Defense Commission (TIDC).TIDC works to improve public defense across Texas by supporting counties through funding, resources, training, and system improvement. The episode will discuss TIDC's Public Defender Offices, regional programs and initiatives, support for rural counties, funding and resources available to communities interested in developing similar programs.If you have an innovation in mental health that you'd like to see on the podcast, email JCMH@txcourts.gov with the subject line "Reimagining Justice."*Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed are the speakers' own and do not represent the views, thoughts, and opinions of the JCMH, the Supreme Court of Texas, or the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. The material and information presented here are for general information purposes only.

Stephanie Rupp (Hoffmann Eitle) and Ryan Phelan (Marshall Gerstein) explore how AI is reshaping medtech innovation and the IP strategies founders need to know. They break down key trends, from traditional model training to today's generative AI workflows, plus common pitfalls like novelty-destroying disclosures in pitch decks, websites, and investor conversations. Ryan explains why “file early” matters in the U.S. (and how provisional applications can backfire if they're too thin), while Stephanie shares how Europe's strict novelty rules and EPO “technical effect” requirements change how AI patents must be drafted. The conversation also covers cross-border collaboration, the Unified Patent Court, and why strong IP can become a startup's moat for investors and future growth. Guest links: https://www.marshallip.com | https://www.hoffmanneitle.com/ | rphelan@marshallip.com | srupp@hoffmanneitle.com  Charity supported: Save the Children Interested in being a guest on the show or have feedback to share? Email us at theleadingdifference@velentium.com.  PRODUCTION CREDITS Host & Editor: Lindsey Dinneen Producer: Velentium Medical   EPISODE TRANSCRIPT Episode 089 - Stephanie Rupp & Ryan Phelan [00:00:00] Lindsey Dinneen: Hi, I'm Lindsey and I'm talking with MedTech industry leaders on how they change lives for a better world. [00:00:09] Diane Bouis: The inventions and technologies are fascinating and so are the people who work with them. [00:00:15] Frank Jaskulke: There was a period of time where I realized, fundamentally, my job was to go hang out with really smart people that are saving lives and then do work that would help them save more lives. [00:00:28] Diane Bouis: I got into the business to save lives and it is incredibly motivating to work with people who are in that same business, saving or improving lives. [00:00:38] Duane Mancini: What better industry than where I get to wake up every day and just save people's lives. [00:00:42] Lindsey Dinneen: These are extraordinary people doing extraordinary work, and this is The Leading Difference.  Hello, and welcome back to another episode of The Leading Difference podcast. I'm your host, Lindsey, and today I'm delighted to welcome as my guests Stephanie Rupp and Ryan Phelan. Stephanie's technical expertise stems from working in various fields of electrical engineering and information technology. She is particularly interested and experienced in communication technology, telecommunications engineering, and artificial intelligence due to her time at the university and various projects in the industry. For example, Stephanie gained industry experience with a leading technology company of measurement and high-frequency technology in the field of measurement technology for LTE. Working with a variety of clients from all over the world, Stephanie specializes in prosecution and oppositions at the European Patent Office and German Patent Office, freedom to operate, and patent drafting, in particular in the fields of computer-implemented inventions. Stephanie studied electrical engineering at the Technical University of Munich. She wrote her master thesis at the Chair of Communication Networks in the field of artificial intelligence with a focus on reinforcement learning. Ryan is a registered patent attorney who counsels and works with clients in all areas of intellectual property with a focus on patents. Clients enjoy Ryan's business-focused approach to IP. With an MBA from Northwestern's Kellogg School of Management, Ryan works with clients to achieve their business objectives, including developing and protecting their innovations and businesses with IP. Ryan has been published in several well-known IP publications, including World Intellectual Property Review, Bloomberg Law, and IP Litigator, and has spoken as a panelist at various IP conferences, including for the International Intellectual Property Law Association and for the University of Illinois Chicago Annual IP Conference. Since 2024, Ryan has been selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America list in the practice of patent law. All right, Ryan and Stephanie, welcome to the show. I'm so glad that you are here. Ryan, this is your second time. Delighted to have you return, and Stephanie, I can't wait to learn more about you and all the ways that you both contribute to the industry. So thank you both so much for being here. [00:02:54] Ryan Phelan: Yeah, thank you. Yeah. Glad to be back. [00:02:56] Lindsey Dinneen: Awesome. [00:02:56] Stephanie Rupp: And thank you v- very much for having me. [00:02:58] Lindsey Dinneen: Yes, of course. Well, I would love, if you don't mind, starting off by sharing just a little bit about yourself, your background, and what led you to medtech. [00:03:09] Ryan Phelan: Yeah. So I'll kick it off. My name's Ryan Phelan. I'm a partner at Marshall Gerstein, which is an IP boutique here in Chicago. I have a computer science background, so I see the world through, you know, everything computers and, of course, nowadays that means AI. On the, the medtech side you know, I, I have, experience in robotics and so, a lot of medtech devices are in the robotics field, so it's very natural for me to apply my skill set, to that, area of expertise, one of which is, prosthetics. So you have a robotic, prosthetic medical device, and that lends itself to, you know, some type of computational control. And there's certain, legal issues that usually come up in, the US practice. So I enjoy, applying that skill set, to the, to medtech space. also, you know, family members als- have, you know, ailments and things that, I have, grown up with, you know, as a, you know, young boy and, now I'm very happy to you know, give back in my own way. I'm not a doctor. I'm just a-- I'm a, I'm a humble patent attorney, but, helping the, IP world, and, doctors and physicians, with not only, you know, in the robotic space, but also, software medical inventions as well, and I, enjoy working in this space. [00:04:22] Lindsey Dinneen: Love it. Thank you so much. Stephanie? [00:04:26] Stephanie Rupp: Yes. So as you hear from my accent, I'm from Germany, specifically from Munich, so that's a city in the southern part of Germany, close to the Alps. people might probably know Munich from the Oktoberfest that we have each year. And, so I'm a German and European patent attorney at Hoffmann Etile. I also throw it in as well, I'm also UPC representative, so we have, for three years now, we have the Unified Patent Court, so a really new court in Europe for centralized litigation for infringement and revocation actions. So I can also represent clients there. yeah, Hoffmann Etile is a, also a p- a IP boutique firm. not only in Germany, we also have offices, in other places in, Europe. And, yeah, my technical background is electrical engineering and information technology. And, during my studies, I just didn't work a lot in the medtech space. I was, ... my work concentrated more on the telecommunications side, working in a, bigger f- company that, concentrated on measurement and high-frequency technology. But, my master thesis was already about AI, so it was at the Chair of Communication Networks, and it was about, like, reinforcement learning, virtual network embedding. I won't say too much about that. I think it will bore the listeners. But so I didn't know at that time, but it opened my way to the medtech space afterwards. because when I joined Hoffmann Etile nine years ago with my training, the partners were really happy to hear that I have experience in the AI field and the technical background on that. And, around nine years ago, we saw a lot of patent applications being filed in the AI space, like using AI technology in different technical fields, and especially also in the medtech, field. And, so I had the opportunity to jump in there, like, right away when I started and was really happy to do that and also, like, still very glad to have that opportunity to work with the medtech, companies and to get the best patents for them in that, especially in that field. [00:06:26] Lindsey Dinneen: Awesome. Thank you so much. Yeah, thank you both. So, all right. I have so many questions, but I will start here. I'll just, 'cause I'm curious. So how, how did you two meet? Do the firms come together and, and, collaborate? [00:06:38] Ryan Phelan: Yeah, absolutely. so Marshall, Gerstein and Hoffmann, Eitel had a relationship prior with, attorneys, that go back a generation or two, before Stephanie and I met. And so, their-- one firm would send attorneys to the other and vice versa. And then, after a while, given that Stephanie and I have similar backgrounds, it was very, simple just to connect us. And then we've worked together on matters, before and have similar backgrounds like Stephanie mentioned. She has electrical background, but has done a lot of stuff with AI. And so whenever you're doing, matters across the pond, as they say, you need expertise, in the EPO and the US and the laws are different, so you have to collaborate. And it's great to have, have people that you can collaborate and work with. [00:07:21] Stephanie Rupp: Yeah, and a lot of clients, they're not only interested in getting an EP patent, but they also want to get a US patent. And, I'm not a US patent attorney, so, usually tell them, "Oh, yeah, I know a really good patent attorney in the US." And, thank you ... so I will, like, hand over the work to him and then the other way around if they have, like, clients that they want to get a EP patent, and that's how we work together and, also dis-discuss these cases together. And, so yeah, I'm currently in Chicago for a week, also to meet Ryan in person again. I do that, usually once a year. And, yeah, just have time to discuss some cases more regularly. [00:07:55] Lindsey Dinneen: I love that. That's cool. [00:07:56] Ryan Phelan: Yeah, I was in, And I was in beautiful Munich last year, so it was, it was great. [00:08:00] Lindsey Dinneen: Very nice. That's wonderful. Okay. So again, so many things to talk about, but I, I, I'm curious in your interpretation of how AI has affected, especially the legal components of, say, filing a patent or IP protection or all of those things. When it comes to medtech founders, what are you seeing the trends to be, and also, what are some of the pitfalls to avoid? [00:08:29] Ryan Phelan: Yeah. So I've seen AI affect everything from filing strategy or information, gathering, like on the pre-stage of a patent, and then also, the invention itself, has also included AI. I think about it as like AI 1.0 and 2.0. before, 1.0 AI is, a lot of software inventions would train their own models with their own data. Maybe you have a, a cardio, application or something like that, that would use existing, information from patients and, that information, would be used to train a model, and that model would be able to output some type of response for a future patient. Maybe that model was inside of a device that was, implanted or, put on top of, a patient where that sensor data would be collected.  Nowadays, in, in tho-those inventions, usually incorporated some type of trained model. Nowadays, you have a lot of generative AI, where newer inventions are using out-of-the-box models from OpenAI, ChatGPT models, or Anthropic's Claude models. And, a lot of the same issues are still being addressed, where data will, will come from various sources, whether it's a patient's data or clinician's, or maybe it's, a diagnostics or maybe it is more in the robotic space for, prosthetics. But that data is now, instead of being pushed into more traditional models that would be trained, is now being used by these generative, LLMs. And then you can have combinations of the two. So it's, become an explosive field in AI at least from what I have seen. People are getting excited that you have these large treasure troves of data that you can synthesize, the information inside of it and then get some type of, useful output, and then you also have inventors that are seeking solutions, asking, LLMs to help find a particular solution, and they'll add to it. And our invention disclosures that we get, I, I typically joke and say, "Used to, it was hard to get an invention disclosure from an inventor." They would send you, like, a paragraph or two of the invention, and you'd be, "Well, is there anything else?" And now it's, they'll send you 100 pages of stuff. And like, "Well, let's, well, let's talk about what's relevant. Let's find the needle in the haystack here." So AI is, is influencing all sides of the invention from when it's coming in the door and then how, how, what the invention makeup is itself and how that's gonna be protected in the future. I, I see a lot-- In, in the future, I, I can predict or hopefully predict, there's gonna be, a lot of litigation or a lot of, like, questions about who owned what in the future for patents. So that's, that'll be interesting to see, too. [00:11:06] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. Absolutely. [00:11:07] Stephanie Rupp: Yeah- I think what I just want to add is, that it also changes how we work. I think in the past it was, so we had, like, these different departments. We had mechanics, e-tech, biotech, chemistry, and it was, like, very clear when you get a new patent, like an invention disclosure in which department you will push it and, like, who will work on that. But now we have, like, more these interdisciplinary inventions especially, like, in medtech, pharmaceutical companies that are using AI and, and that also changes how we work, that we are trying to then find a interdisciplinary team as well, having, like, patent attorneys from different technical backgrounds, because I'm looking at a invention disclosure differently than a patent attorney with a chemistry background. And, so that makes very interesting for us as well, 'cause we have to work together and, that's why sometime I get a call from the biotech department saying, "Oh, we have a invention disclosure with a lot of AI in there. Could you maybe help us out?" And, so that, yeah, it, like, changes our way of working in there as well. That makes it very interesting. [00:12:12] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. That's very interesting, and I actually love that. It seems like a lot of, ability to learn from each other in that way, and so yeah, I love that exposure. So, okay, when it comes to filing patents, and protecting your IP in general, I'm, I'm curious what your advice is for, for founders that maybe have, like, basically timeline, when should they be thinking about engaging with you all, and h- how do they go about that? Just what is, especially for these younger startup founders, what's some advice that you just, you go, "Okay, now's the time. Here's what we need," and, and whatnot? [00:12:51] Ryan Phelan: Yeah, I always advise as early as possible. Okay. usually it's-- usually most founders or startups are not thinking about patents in the beginning. But, you know, I always like to, to tell them when, when I'm speaking to a founder of a startup, think about it as insurance or similar to insurance, because at the end of the day, if you become very successful with your, medtech product, whatever it may be, people are gonna wanna copy you. [00:13:13] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. [00:13:13] Ryan Phelan: And, that, that's probably not only important to you, but also to your investors, if you have them. If, like, you're seeking money from others, whether it be seed money, angel money, or series A, series B the, these people are probably gonna ask you what's your moat, what's your, what's your barrier to entry for others, so if your product, takes off, because they're thinking in terms of, "How much money will I get back if I invest?" It's gonna be s- 20x. And so, it-- they know, and the startup founders should also be aware that if somebody else comes into the market, especially a big player, and they, replicate your product or your software, then that could take market share from you. And so having a patent or building that patent portfolio at the same time, it protects you, from that. It also, of course, there's times, timing, that you have to be mindful of. As soon as you disclose something in the US, it kicks off a, a one-year clock... [00:14:04] Lindsey Dinneen: Hmm ... [00:14:04] Ryan Phelan: ...for you to file something. Just to get an invention in the US, and Stephanie, can let you know about, you know, elsewhere- Mm-hmm ... and in the EU, I understand that there's an absolute bar. Yeah. But for that reasons, for that timing purpose of when someone discloses your invention, and that can be a part of a pitch deck to a set of in- investors, if you don't have a non-disclosure a- agreement, an NDA, then that could also start that clock ticking. So you wanna be mindful. Do this in parallel at the same time, seeking to get your, patent, at least a provisional patent, on file before you go forward. [00:14:37] Stephanie Rupp: Okay. Yeah, as Ryan said, at the, in Europe, we don't have this kind of this year to file a application. Once you publish something, then it's out on, out there in the world and, endangers your own patent application. Because if you want to get a patent the claimed subject matter needs to be novel and inventive. And if you have, like, published this before, then that's prior art with respect to your own patent application. So you always have to keep that in mind and, that's why it's so important to file the patent application first before you use that information for advertisement, for example. And I, we see that often, with startups, and I complete- completely understand. They're super excited with regard to their, like, great idea, and they want to shout it out to the world. But once it's out there that hinders you to get a patent. so- As Ryan said, it's good to think about patents from the beginning and also, the market you're interested in, maybe about competitors and where they're in, which countries they're involved, and then you could also think about, okay, maybe, that is a market of your interest, and then also get advice from patent attorneys in that country because it's different from which d- like, from jurisdiction to jurisdiction how to get a patent, and you want to get the broadest patent as possible. And, especially with AI inventions, where they're the requirements are so different in the different countries, it's, good to have the advice from the beginning on so the patent application is written in the right way. Because once the patent application is filed, we cannot add anything anymore, or we cannot change it. That's why it's, like, good to have really a, like, a well-written patent application also for the jurisdiction you want to go in. [00:16:25] Lindsey Dinneen: Okay. Yeah. Thank you both. That was really insightful. I'm, I'm curious about the patent application itself. Is there-- Well, two questions, I suppose. Is there also a kind of provisional patent opportunity outside of the US, just out of curiosity, as, as well as in the US? And then also, you know, you mentioned being very careful and cognizant about the way that it is written, which of course now you two being experts in this, you know, back, you know, like the back of your hand. But I wonder, if people try to do it themselves. I would love just to hear some advice about that as well. [00:17:06] Ryan Phelan: Yes. Stephanie, do you wanna talk about the provisional outside the US and- [00:17:09] Stephanie Rupp: Yeah. So in Europe, we don't have that provisional applications or non-provisional applications. what you have though is the priority year. So you can, like file an application, for example, first in Europe, and then you have a year to decide which other countries you want to go to, and then claim priority from that European patent application. So, I file a EP application, then after a year I think, okay, I want to go in other countries, I want to maybe file it, one in the US, then you can claim the priority from there. And the previous patent application that you filed will not endanger the other patent application. So that's one way of doing it, to buying yourself a little bit of time. Also, sometimes clients when they're like very cost sensitive, especially for startups, would first think, okay, we file a patent application first to Europe, and you get a, a search report within the priority year from the EPO. And then you already know the prior art that is out there, and you can assess how strong your patent application is, and then you can still decide, how to proceed from there. So there are like some ways of how you could do that. [00:18:19] Lindsey Dinneen: Awesome. Thank you. [00:18:22] Ryan Phelan: Yeah. In the US, of course, we have provisional applications. It, it causes a great, amount of confusion, though, the provisional applications. A lot of startup companies will think that they can file a provisional application and it'll be, you know, a page or two in length, and then they can wait a year and inflate that to 20 pages or, or something like this. And of course, the, the trap for the unwary is, of course, if the claims, when you draft those for the non-provisional or the conversion application, if they are not grounded in that first provisional application, if one element of one of the independent claims, for example, is, s- solely supported by the new material added in the, the new, you know, 20 pages or whatever it may be, then the support gets you the date of your non-provisional conversion filing and not of the provisional. So, usually for startup clients, I have to-- we ta- we have this conversation called the delta. What's the delta between your provisional and your non-provisional? If there's a lot of it, then, that could be a problem because if your claims aren't supported by the text of that provisional application, you're not gonna get that original date. And so, usually that kicks off a conversation of how much of a provisional that you want, or do you just wanna go all non-provisional. Now, I do litigation as well, and I can tell you, the, the, the pitfall is if you file that provisional and you file a non-provisional later and you end up getting that later date, if there is intervening prior art in between, the provisional date and the non-provisional date, that comes before your non-provisional date, that could invalidate your patent despite your provisional. And there's, parties debate this. They, excuse me, fight about this in court all the time. Now, did you have sufficient written description and enablement in your provisional application in order to substantiate your claims later? And if they can find intervening prior art between that year or whatever the time may be, that can be a real problem. So, I, I always c- I always tell clients, like, the, the more you can file up front, the better, because you're gonna get more support or more, possibility to have that support earlier in time. Of course, it takes more work. Most startups don't like to hear that, but it is, but it is the truth, and it does, it does protect them against that insurance policy. You, you add it up front. Like Stephanie said, you wanna, put that information, on file before you go out and do your advertising and marketing. That's also true in the US. Just filing a provisional application, does not in and of itself somehow protect you if, if you don't, if you don't say what it is that you're trying to protect. [00:20:48] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. Okay. That makes a lot of sense, and thank you so much for that insight. So you mentioned a couple of times that sort of disclosure component, and so just to d- just be very specific about that whole thing you mentioned that could be-- that could look like even just a, a pitch deck where you think it's potentially within a, a private setting thing. Of course, I would imagine that also extends to talking about it on social media or a website or something like that. So I'm just curious what are some of the things that you see besides maybe perhaps the broader, more obvious, like a website, what are some of those things that you see that people don't think to, be aware of, I guess? [00:21:34] Ryan Phelan: Yeah. I've seen websites. It's super easy to create a website nowadays. You can ask ChatGPT or Claude to generate a website, and if you're putting your invention out in a website form before you file a patent, that could be a novelty-destroying disclosure. if you have a detailed pitch deck that you give to, potential investors without some type of control, like an NDA, that could also be a novelty form of disclosure. Like in the US, for litigation, I, I can tell you one of the questions that always gets asked in discovery is, "Did you disclose this prior to the, the filing date?" And, if that person, that person will be required to answer under oath, and if they're, "Yes, I had a website," or, "I, I gave this pitch deck to 50 people for investing," usually that's a problem because that--the opposing side that's defending against that patent will do a, a deep analysis and, and look-- and try to find when that was disclosed, and does it map up to the claims, and that could, create a problem with, validity in the US. [00:22:31] Lindsey Dinneen: Oof. That's no fun. That's why they should talk- Yeah ... to you early and often. [00:22:37] Ryan Phelan: Yeah. Yes. Again, another example of filing early, you know, eliminates some of those issues. i-in fact, I tell a lot of the startup companies or any, any client, like, before you go out there and, you know, have your conference or your, your pitch, then file. Most sophisticated clients know this, but a lot of times startups do not. [00:22:54] Lindsey Dinneen: Sure. Yeah, and if you're a first-time founder or something like that, you wouldn't-- you don't know what you don't know for many different categories, so I can see why that is so critical. Yeah. Okay. So, I was wondering if both of you could talk a little bit about maybe, maybe a moment that has stood out to you as, as you've worked, especially with-within medtech and, and working with some of these founders. Are there any moments that really stand out as just affirming that, "Wow, I, I am doing the right thing in the right industry at the right time"? [00:23:28] Stephanie Rupp: Shall I start? Yeah. yes, I, I've-- So for me it was, like, never the plan to become a patent attorney and, and, like, never had that in mind. And, so it was more of a coincidence that I stumbled upon that and did the training and became a patent attorney and... But I still remember my first day in the office and having the feeling of, "Yes, I think that's what I want to do for the rest of my life." Like, continue learning, like, having, like, this incredible opportunity to speak with so many great inventors. Having, like, I don't know, it's always amazing, to see how their mind works and that they're, like, finding solutions for s- like, very complex problems. And, so that, like, from the day, first day on, I had, like, the feeling, okay, I think I can really help here and, protect their asset the best way possible. And then especially within the medtech field, I think what Ryan also said in the beginning, there's like, it's also for me, sometimes it's a kind of s- scary part thinking about, okay, what if you get sick at one point, or like from closer family that got really sick, and, having like this helpless feeling like that you maybe can't change anything here. And then when you work with the medtech industry and you see that they are working on that problem and have these great idea- to help people to like, that there's also k- some kind of involvem- like involvement in this technology. And, so for example, I, there's like one of my clients, they are, working on histological images and analyzing them also with respect to cancer types, and how AI can be such a great help there. And of course, there are like a lot of these discussions about, how we should be careful with the new technology and how we could re- regulate that and stuff like that, but there's also like so much good in there that can really help people's lives. And I think that's like for me, always very nice that yes, Ryan said we're no doctors. So like, we're just like patent attorneys, but still we could contribute a little bit to that too. Yeah. [00:25:34] Lindsey Dinneen: Love it. [00:25:35] Ryan Phelan: Yeah. I would just, I would just echo everything that Stephanie said. That certainly is why I enjoy working in this space too, is, you, you feel like you have a, a little bit of contribution that you make. [00:25:44] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. Absolutely. I, I couldn't agree more. I think, to your point, Stephanie, it's, it's so inspiring to see the innovation that's coming out, and it makes you feel like, especially when there's difficult world news, it makes you think, "Okay, but at least there are still these change makers who are really trying to make the world a better place and, and improve patient lives." And I think that's just a, a wonderful thing to get to witness and be a, a part of. It helps the soul. So, I'm always curious about the personal side of things as well. So just what are, what are some of the things that you all en- enjoy doing, say, outside of work? maybe some hobbies or volunteering or interests and things like that. What are... Let's, let's talk about the people as well behind these amazing patent attorneys. [00:26:36] Ryan Phelan: Yeah. everybody has a hobby, so I, I was, I like to run. I was running since high school, so I like to do that. And then, in the winter I like to ski. and then I'm, recently getting my scuba cert, with my daughter. So we're having a good time doing that this summer. So just trying to stay busy and active. I like to learn always, and so I, I, I love learning, I guess. and one of the reason why medtech is interesting to me 'cause I like to apply that, computer science skill to, the medtech field and continuously learn, in that space and also give back, like we talked about before. So, yeah, I guess I would lump in learning as one of my hobbies as well. I like... I, I'll say, and I, I'm not sure if we'll get into this later I think you had a question about, poss- if we, if we could teach one class or- No, we'll get into that ... [00:27:20] Lindsey Dinneen: Something like that. Yeah. [00:27:22] Ryan Phelan: Yeah, okay. I'll, I'll save that for a later time. So. [00:27:23] Lindsey Dinneen: Okay. Yes. Excellent. Stephanie? [00:27:28] Stephanie Rupp: Yeah, I think that's, one common thing that we have, Ryan and I. It's, skiing. That's also what I enjoy a lot. so as I said, I'm from Munich, and it's very close to the Alps, so it takes us only, like, about, like, two hours to go to Austria. and so, but I really enjoy going there for the weekend, clearing my mind. Yeah, especially when the week was very busy with work. so it's like, thinking about something else. And, besides that, yeah, spending time outside, going hiking at the weekend, like when it's... there's no snow. Also, I picked up some hobbies that I had when I was younger. So for example, I had, piano classes for, like, when I was five years old, and then once I had, like, the training and everything else going on, paused that because, like, so much else going on. But then last few years I, taught myself, "Oh yeah, it would be such a waste not to do that anymore." And, so I'm, like, started playing piano again. I'm not good in it. It's more really as a hobby. And, but yeah doing something else in the evening and clearing my mind. So that's what I usually like to do as well. [00:28:35] Lindsey Dinneen: I love that. That's wonderful. I, yes, I, I understand that sometimes picking up a hobby that you sort of set aside for a while is really fun as an adult, 'cause you have a different way of interpreting that learning, back to your point, Ryan, of how it, it it changes. And I, I actually really enjoy that, of, of revisiting something where I might have thought g- especially growing up. Like for instance, I remember thinking I just could not paint for the life of me, like it was never gonna happen. And then as an adult, with a, an instructor who was... maybe s- spoke a slightly different, in a different way, and then getting to like go, "Oh, maybe I can" is always a nice thing to learn too. But anyway. [00:29:17] Stephanie Rupp: And also taking, taking the pressure out of it. Yes. So it's like, as I said, like piano class is just a hobby. I don't have to be good in it. It's just should give me some joy in it. And so yeah. [00:29:27] Lindsey Dinneen: Love that. Yeah. Yeah, okay. So now you've both been in positions of leadership, and I'm curious, and, and I know it's hard to boil it down to maybe one thing, but what is one or two, three things that you would say is your top leadership advice, especially for those who maybe are more in, middle management trying to continue to build their leadership skills? And what, what makes a good leader, in your mind, and then maybe what's one or two pieces of advice? [00:30:02] Ryan Phelan: Yeah. What makes a good leader in my mind is something that somebody that can lead by example, I guess. On like a first project or a new client or a new matter, I like to do it, do it myself once so I can go through it and, get the feeling for the new technology, that may be at play or the new matter, maybe the client's preferences whether it's a startup or a large company. And then once I have that kind of lead from the front, then I like to do, I guess, a military word, dis- decentralized command, which is get people that I trust and who I have a great assistant. I have attorneys that I work with European attorneys such as Stephanie, and then give them work with them and give them free reign and control, whether it's a colleague like Stephanie or a associate here at Marshall Gerstein to, work with the client or have agency over, what they do, 'cause I think it can also teach in that capacity, like things that I learned from the lead from the front can flow, down or through or out and then, that person can also learn on the job doing it themselves. I believe that, people doing, instead of just listening is the, a best way to learn for them and then also get better. And so I, I tend to approach, leadership, from that perspective. [00:31:12] Lindsey Dinneen: Love that. Yeah. Stephanie? [00:31:15] Stephanie Rupp: Yes. I see myself like still more at the beginning of my career, so I can, talk a little bit more of how I, see or like, yeah, see leadership or like, how I experience it. Yeah. it's more also I... like everything what Ryan said, I completely agree. And also like seeing the person behind that. It's like everyone is like very busy, especially when you're in leadership positions and, very busy schedules and, But also seeing the person as a whole- Mm ... and how could you like support them to be better, to grow and, how to also, yeah- lead them or like, yeah, lead them in the way they w- where they want to be at some point. And, I think that's, yeah, what you should not forget e- especially when you have a really busy schedule. That's it. [00:32:11] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. The, the person behind... Yeah. That, that's an interesting theme that continues to come up, time and time again, is, you know, if one of the tricks to being a good leader is to care. It seems so straightforward, but it's if you care about the person and you, you want the best for them, you are going to naturally be a better leader because you're investing in them and, and in their success and goals, and, it's, it's just cool to see. Okay, and then, all right, I'm just going to pivot the conversation a little bit for fun, and this is where exactly what you were referring to earlier, Ryan. So if you were to be offered a million dollars to teach a master class on anything you want, could be in your industry, but doesn't have to be, what would you choose to teach? [00:32:58] Ryan Phelan: I would teach a class called Patenting Software Inventions and, I'm actually currently teaching that class. Oh. they're not-- I'm not getting paid a million dollars to do it, unfortunately. [00:33:07] Lindsey Dinneen: Dang. [00:33:07] Ryan Phelan: But, but it is a, a, a passion and a love. I teach it at, Northwestern Law, where I went to law school. I-- it's, it's my pleasure and joy every year to go back. I teach a power course there every year, I think for the past eight years on, teaching students how to patent software inventions in the US, and I think, elsewhere there's a, you know, there has become, by at least some people, the belief that you can't patent software, you know, which of course is, not true. And so, you know, I teach methodologies in my class about how to, patent software inventions in the US using you know, guidance from the courts, from the Supreme Court, from the Federal Circuit, from the district courts here, in the US. A lot of it covers, things such as Section 101 you know, that changed, in 2014, from the Supreme Court's decision in Alice v. CLS, and how to address, issues, about what the, the court said there. And then also what later courts, the Federal Circuit, said that they wanted to see in order to overcome, Section 101 issues, in the US. A lot of times, too, it's interesting, we have, like, a small slide like that, that deals with EPO-- which Stephanie's much more adept than, than I am-- but what we tell our students is, and maybe Stephanie can address this, is that, you know, there seems to be a convergence, between Section 101 law and, something called a technical effect, an EPO, where it seems like both jurisdictions are wanting to see more of a technical disclosure incorporated into the application rather than just kind of claiming functionally or a high level language. So you need to be very careful in crafting these applications so there's-- they're successful when you're in front of the the patent office in the US. And if you, you do it right, you can, create, you know, not only a US-centric application, but one that might, withstand, the strictures of the EPO. In my opinion, I think that the EPO can sometimes-- and maybe this is just me being a US practitioner-- but the EPO can be somewhat more difficult, to get a patent, application. Maybe Stephanie would disagree and say it's the other way around, but but it's always good, and clients usually, even if they're not thinking about it, to have an application that could survive both places 'cause they tend to be, I think, the, the two more, more difficult, if not most difficult jurisdictions in the world to get a patent application. And if you go into it knowing and how to craft a patent application and you're ready, and you put into that application the right, material, then you can be successful. [00:35:40] Lindsey Dinneen: Awesome. Stephanie, what would you teach? [00:35:44] Stephanie Rupp: Yeah, maybe we, Ryan and I, could do a master class together then because he said, like, then we could explain the similarities or the differences between, US patent law and European patent law, and can also maybe, also add something about the UPC that we have now, the U- Unified Patent Court, and have a, maybe a lively discussion about all of that and, how to get the strongest and broadest, patent in the different jurisdictions. And as Ryan said, there are, like, some similarities, and I also have the feeling when I discuss with Ryan that, when we have a patent application where we struggle to get a patent on, then we usually also struggle with that in the US- Mm-hmm ... or the other way around. And, but of course, there are, like, differences in how the EPO and how the USPTO, like examine these AI inventions and, in the US you have these 101 objections that you usually get. In, Europe it's, they apply the so-called two hurdle approach where they, especially the second hurdle is usually harder to overcome. Mm. And that's also what, Ryan mentioned, is that you have to show the EPO that your AI invention or your AI steps contribute to the technical character of the invention. And that's, often, and I totally understand that, hard to grasp for an inventor because they think we have all these technical means here. We have a server, we have a processor, we have a memory, we have sensors getting data. Do you tell me now that that's not technical? [00:37:18] Lindsey Dinneen: Mm. [00:37:19] Stephanie Rupp: And, but that's not how the EPO thinks. It's, for them, they say, "What is your motivation for that invention?" Or, or in other, more their words, "What kind of technical problem you try to solve?" [00:37:32] Lindsey Dinneen: Mm. [00:37:34] Stephanie Rupp: And that is, what we also usually ask the inventors in our f- like, first meetings with them, "What is the technical problem you're trying to solve with that, and how does the, your AI steps, your method steps contribute to that?" Because that's, if you cannot show that to the EPO, then it's very hard to get a patent on. so maybe my combined master class- yeah ... where we show that and- It, [00:37:59] Ryan Phelan: It would- ... [00:38:00] Stephanie Rupp: Explain that, yeah. So ... [00:38:01] Ryan Phelan: Definitely it would, it would help out my meager EPO slide, any additional information on this, especially the, the UPC, which I'm glad you mentioned. But, maybe, we could take a minute to talk about the UPC and in, in the European area since that's like a new, newer, from what I understand, a newer avenue, the era approach in Europe. [00:38:20] Stephanie Rupp: Yeah. Yeah. It's, so as I said, we have, like, for now three years now, the, Unified Patent Court. And, before that we also had European patents, but once it was granted, was divided into national patents. So if you wanted to, file an infringement action or a nullity action, you had to do that in each specific country. And that made it very complicated because I, I'm a German patent attorney. I don't know anything about Italian law, so you would then need an Italian patent attorney or French and so on. So it was, like, very complicated. And, so what we now have, and that is, like, very exciting to live at that time now, is, the Unified Patent Court, where it's, like, now centralized and you can attack patents at the, like, Unified Patent Court, like, for the whole patent, and you don't have to go to these before the national courts anymore. And, so that's, like, very exciting for us as well because case law is evolving now and, there's, yeah, you can see how, like, how it changes and how the judges are handling these cases and it's, like, also very, like, for us, a lot of new things to learn. [00:39:32] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. [00:39:32] Stephanie Rupp: Yeah. [00:39:33] Ryan Phelan: Yeah, I was gonna say, I, I also heard, and, Stephanie can certainly chime on this, that certain cities in Europe, like Paris, or Munich, may have different judges that specialize in different arts or disciplines. I think, was it, w- what Munich was, I can't remember, is that the mechanical or- Yeah. [00:39:49] Stephanie Rupp: Yeah. So that's, like, for the central division, but we also have then local divisions- Mm-hmm ... as well. So we have, four local divisions in Germany, but also in other countries. And that also, changes, of course, a little bit of how they handle the cases because the judges, they often came from the, like, the national courts. So they, like, when you're in Germany, of course, they still have little bit, little bit more of the German thinking in them. When you're going to a Dutch, local division, then they have a little bit of, like, another, like, view on that. And I think over time it will, like, unify a little bit. but these are, like, also differences that, makes it very interesting, to see. [00:40:27] Lindsey Dinneen: All right. Okay, so next question is, how do you wish to be remembered after you leave this world? [00:40:35] Ryan Phelan: I hope that people remember me as, somebody that was fun, like to, you know, either work or hang out with that regardless of whether we're working hard or, you know, playing hard, that, that it was just fun. So that, that's my only wish. So or, or main wish. [00:40:50] Lindsey Dinneen: Love it. Steph? [00:40:52] Stephanie Rupp: Yeah, I think for me that I was maybe, like, a fair and trustworthy person. I think it sounds a little bit boring, but, more when people work with me and they, like, say, "Oh, when she gave me advice, I knew that she had, like, my best interest in mind as well, and not only, like, filling her own pockets or, like, trying to, like, improve it for herself, but having like..." Yeah, when they remember me of a person that you could trust with the advice, I think that would be, like nice to know for me. Yeah. [00:41:26] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah, for sure. All right. Excellent. And then final question. What is one thing that makes you smile every time you see or think about it? [00:41:37] Ryan Phelan: I guess just sticking with our current theme, if in a work capacity, when a client gets a victory of some type certainly makes me smile. A lot of clients are happy when they get their patents allowed, or if you win that litigation case or you, you do things, a lot of times in the US we'll, we'll have these decisions or these patents, and it it, it, it makes me smile to think that, you know, I helped their business in that way to protect their, their IP and just going forward. I, I imagine it's a pretty standard answer, but, you know, certainly in the context of this podcast, that's absolutely one thing that makes me happy. [00:42:10] Stephanie Rupp: Mm. Yeah. I'm a person, I get excited very quickly or, like, really small things make me smile already. So I arrived on Saturday in Chicago, and I, for example, didn't expect to have a gym in the hotel, and then suddenly I discovered that and was really happy about that. So these are these small things that other people say, "Oh, yeah, whatever." but I think what makes me smile the most is, like, knowing that I have a weekend ahead of me with, like, my family and my partner, and we go ski. And I say that now we have, like, summer outs and, like, very warm temperature here in Chicago. I think it's about 80 degrees, and I'm already thinking about skiing and snow, but it's, more of... [00:42:52] Ryan Phelan: It's never too early. [00:42:53] Stephanie Rupp: Yeah. But more of, like, not the skiing per se, but just having time with family and- yeah ... clearing my mind and stuff like that. So, yeah. [00:43:02] Lindsey Dinneen: Excellent. Excellent. Well, thank you both so much for being here. I've so enjoyed the conversation, and you gave so much amazing advice and guidance, so thank you so very, very much for all of that. If folks who should be looking out for services such as yourselves, how do they get in touch with you? [00:43:25] Stephanie Rupp: I think like through the website, that, I think will be- mm-hmm published, with the, podcast. And, also my email address as well. You can find me on the website, or we can also add it to the, to the podcast info. yeah. [00:43:38] Ryan Phelan: What is your... [00:43:38] Stephanie Rupp: It's the easiest ... [00:43:38] Ryan Phelan: What is your email address, Stephanie? [00:43:41] Stephanie Rupp: It... Hopefully I say it correct now. It's, S for Stephanie, S Rupp, my, last name, @hoffmanneitle.com, so very easy. Yeah. [00:43:53] Ryan Phelan: Perfect. Excellent. Yeah, same thing for me. I believe the contact information will be at the with the podcast, but I can be reached at RPhelan R-P-H-E-L-A-N @marshallip.com, and welcome any questions or comments. [00:44:08] Lindsey Dinneen: Awesome. Well, thank you both so much again for your time today. We really appreciate it. We are so honored to be making a donation on your behalf as a thank you for your time today to Save the Children, which works to end the cycle of poverty by ensuring communities have the resources to provide children with a healthy, educational, and safe environment. So thank you so much for choosing that charity to support, and also thank you for continuing to work to change lives for a better world. Love learning about you, about your areas of expertise, and just really appreciate you, being willing to share with us. So thanks again, and, I suppose until next time. [00:44:51] Ryan Phelan: Thank you. Love to come back. [00:44:53] Stephanie Rupp: Thank you. Awesome. Yeah. Thank you so much. [00:44:55] Dan Purvis: The Leading Difference is brought to you by Velentium Medical. Velentium Medical is a full service CDMO, serving medtech clients worldwide to securely design, manufacture, and test class two and class three medical devices. Velentium Medical's four units include research and development-- pairing electronic and mechanical design, embedded firmware, mobile app development, and cloud systems with the human factor studies and systems engineering necessary to streamline medical device regulatory approval; contract manufacturing-- building medical products at the prototype, clinical, and commercial levels in the US, as well as in low cost regions in 1345 certified and FDA registered Class VII clean rooms; cybersecurity-- generating the 12 cybersecurity design artifacts required for FDA submission; and automated test systems, assuring that every device produced is exactly the same as the device that was approved. Visit VelentiumMedical.com to explore how we can work together to change lives for a better world.

Less than two months before the midterms, the Supreme Court made a shockingly good decision and rejected a Trump rule that would have restricted mail-in ballots and possibly disenfranchised millions of voters. But Trump and Republicans are not done messing with the integrity of America's elections. This week, Alex is joined by Janai Nelson, President and Director-Counsel of the Legal Defense Fund, to discuss the gargantuan effort to defeat Trump's executive order on mail-in voting. Then she's joined by Kate Shaw, co-host of Crooked's Strict Scrutiny, to talk about the desperate need for Supreme Court reform, and how we ended up in this right wing nightmare of a justice system.Pre-order Alex's new book, The Steal: Four Right-Wing Hard-Liners, One Republican Presidency, and The Raid On America's Courts and subscribe to her Substack here.Hate listening to ads? Become a Friends of the Pod subscriber for ad-free episodes of Pod Save America, Pod Save the World, Lovett or Leave It, Runaway Country, Offline with Jon Favreau, and more—plus exclusive content, including bonus episodes of Pod Save America. Subscribe now at crooked.com/friends, on Apple Podcasts, or through the Pod Save America YouTube channel.You can request a transcript by emailing transcripts@crooked.com. Include the podcast name, episode title, and air date. Please allow 48 hours for delivery.

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss whether this week's Supreme Court intervention rejecting Trump's mail-in ballot restrictions will prevent midterm chaos, explore the fast-evolving dynamics of public and political anxieties about AI, and dissect remarkable new reporting from ProPublica exposing the Putin-adjacent Russian oligarch who paid for much of Donald Trump Jr.'s private island wedding.Here are this week's chatters: Emily: New podcast Examined: The Backfire Effect, by Josie Duffy Rice; Supremacy: How Rule by the Court Replaced Government by the People by Nikolas Bowie and Daphna Renan John: Wild Card with Rachel Martin (NPR): John Dickerson says doubt only helps to solidify his faith; Derek DelGaudio's In & Of Itself (Trailer on YouTube) (Streaming on Hulu); Linda Holmes for NPR: 'In & Of Itself' Is A Study Of Identity And Magic; AMORALMAN: A True Story and Other Lies by Derek DelGaudio David: Colin from Accounts on Paramount Plus; Daniel Wu for The Washington Post: Pollution spikes after Trump halted global air-monitoring efforts, report says Listener chatter from Julian Ozen in Brooklyn, NY: Ordinary Abundance For this week's Slate Plus bonus episode, Emily, John, and David discuss what California Gov. Gavin Newsom told Jake Tapper about running for president in 2028. They discuss the signaling work of the fly-fishing tableau, what Newsom is really saying about Harris, and whether there's an appetite in the Democratic party for either of them to run. In the latest Gabfest Reads, David Plotz talks with John Lanchester about his new novel, Look What You Made Me Do, a darkly funny psychological thriller about two couples in modern-day London whose lives collide in a story of infidelity, obsession, and revenge. The book explores the performance of niceness, class, intergenerational frictions and how technology makes vengeance not just possible but almost exceedingly easy in the modern age. Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.) Podcast production by Nina Porzucki Research by Emily DittoYou can find the full Political Gabfest show pages here. Want more Political Gabfest? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Political Gabfest show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or visit slate.com/gabfestplus to get access wherever you listen. Find out more about David Plotz's monthly tours of Ft. DeRussy, the secret Civil War fort hidden in Rock Creek Park. Follow@SlateGabfest on X / https://twitter.com/SlateGabfestSlate Political Gabfest on Facebook / https://www.facebook.com/Gabfest/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.

Those concerned that the Trump administration will interfere with the upcoming midterm elections can breathe a little easier this week, as the Supreme Court threw out their plan to have the Post Office muck up mail-in voting. But are we out of the woods yet?Guest: Ari Berman, Mother Jones' national voting rights correspondent.Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.Podcast production by Evan Campbell, Madeline Thames-Ducharme and Patrick Fort.Paige Osburn is the senior supervising producer of What Next and What Next TBD. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss whether this week's Supreme Court intervention rejecting Trump's mail-in ballot restrictions will prevent midterm chaos, explore the fast-evolving dynamics of public and political anxieties about AI, and dissect remarkable new reporting from ProPublica exposing the Putin-adjacent Russian oligarch who paid for much of Donald Trump Jr.'s private island wedding.Here are this week's chatters: Emily: New podcast Examined: The Backfire Effect, by Josie Duffy Rice; Supremacy: How Rule by the Court Replaced Government by the People by Nikolas Bowie and Daphna Renan John: Wild Card with Rachel Martin (NPR): John Dickerson says doubt only helps to solidify his faith; Derek DelGaudio's In & Of Itself (Trailer on YouTube) (Streaming on Hulu); Linda Holmes for NPR: 'In & Of Itself' Is A Study Of Identity And Magic; AMORALMAN: A True Story and Other Lies by Derek DelGaudio David: Colin from Accounts on Paramount Plus; Daniel Wu for The Washington Post: Pollution spikes after Trump halted global air-monitoring efforts, report says Listener chatter from Julian Ozen in Brooklyn, NY: Ordinary Abundance For this week's Slate Plus bonus episode, Emily, John, and David discuss what California Gov. Gavin Newsom told Jake Tapper about running for president in 2028. They discuss the signaling work of the fly-fishing tableau, what Newsom is really saying about Harris, and whether there's an appetite in the Democratic party for either of them to run. In the latest Gabfest Reads, David Plotz talks with John Lanchester about his new novel, Look What You Made Me Do, a darkly funny psychological thriller about two couples in modern-day London whose lives collide in a story of infidelity, obsession, and revenge. The book explores the performance of niceness, class, intergenerational frictions and how technology makes vengeance not just possible but almost exceedingly easy in the modern age. Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.) Podcast production by Nina Porzucki Research by Emily DittoYou can find the full Political Gabfest show pages here. Want more Political Gabfest? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Political Gabfest show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or visit slate.com/gabfestplus to get access wherever you listen. Find out more about David Plotz's monthly tours of Ft. DeRussy, the secret Civil War fort hidden in Rock Creek Park. Follow@SlateGabfest on X / https://twitter.com/SlateGabfestSlate Political Gabfest on Facebook / https://www.facebook.com/Gabfest/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As the Fed battles inflation and Americans bear the costs, Jon is joined by Lindsay Owens, President and CEO of the Groundwork Collaborative and author of the new book “Gouged: The End of a Fair Price—and What That Means for Your Wallet.” Together, they uncover how corporations collude to manipulate prices—and expose the new tools and technologies companies are using to track us, target us, and charge us more at checkout. Plus, Jon answers listeners' questions about whether there's any point in even asking Trump questions, the Supreme Court, and when to decorate for Halloween! This episode is brought to you by: QUINCE - Head to https://Quince.com/tws for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Now available in Canada and the UK, too. TREES.COM - Get 20% off at https://trees.com with code TWS. MINT MOBILE - Shop plans at https://MintMobile.com/TWS. UPWORK - : Visit https://Upwork.com/TWS right now and post your job for free. Follow The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart on social media for more:  > YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@weeklyshowpodcast > Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/weeklyshowpodcast > TikTok: https://tiktok.com/@weeklyshowpodcast  > X: https://x.com/weeklyshowpod   > BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/theweeklyshowpodcast.com Host/Executive Producer – Jon Stewart Executive Producer – James Dixon Executive Producer – Chris McShane Executive Producer – Caity Gray Producer – Brittany Mehmedovic  Producer – Gillian Spear Video Editor & Engineer – Rob Vitolo Audio Editor & Engineer – Nicole Boyce Associate Producer - Rebecca Rottenberg Music by Hansdle Hsu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

For the latest Contrarian episode, Norm Eisen, Rep. Tom Malinowski, and Jen Rubin join Harry to stake out their cautious optimism about Trump's declining strength. The panel takes stock of the administration's vital Supreme Court defeat in the mail-in ballots case before looking at the ways the wheels are falling off the DOJ's opaque "grand conspiracy" investigation. Finally, with rising gas prices lifting Democrats' midterm hopes, the group assess what actions Democrats need to take if they regain the House or Senate come November. Mentioned in this episode:The Contrarian.Harry's column about the mail-in ruling.Harry's Substack Live with Steve Vladeck about the mail-in ruling. Jen's column about how Democrats should use the power of the purse.Tom's article about what Democrats should do with a majority. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From the SCOTUSblog Summit, Sarah Isgur, David French, and Amy Howe discuss the cases scheduled thus far for the Supreme Court's upcoming term. The three discuss the most consequential case for the Trump administration, David throws in a Star Wars reference (at the behest of Sarah!), and Amy answers the most important case question correctly.  The Agenda: –Decision handed down in Trump's mail voting case –What case got dropped this term –The most important case this term –Climate change on trial? –Religious liberty and rolling our eyes at Colorado –Is Trump going to win this one? –What's still to come 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

With less than 50 days until the midterm elections, major battles are already underway over voting rights, election rules, redistricting, and how Americans vote.Katie Couric sits down with Marc Elias, a leading election lawyer, founder of Democracy Docket, and founder of Elias Law Group, to discuss the legal fights shaping the 2026 midterms.They discuss the Supreme Court's recent rulings on mail-in voting, rapidly changing congressional maps, voter rolls, election security, and what could happen if election results are challenged after Election Day. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the third installment of our Hot Supreme Court Reform September series, Leah sits down with Daphna Renan and Nikolas Bowie to discuss how judicial supremacy became the default operating system of the federal government, and how limiting the Supreme Court's power to decline to enforce federal statutes is a crucial tool for reining it in. Niko and Daphna's book is Supremacy: How Rule by the Court Replaced Government by the People. Enter the giveaway here!Take the Strict Scrutiny survey.New Strict Scrutiny merch available here.You can now listen to Strict Scrutiny for CLE credits in California, New York, Texas, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Washington, and Oregon! More info at crooked.com/strict_cleGet tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE on November 6th in Washington, DC: Crookedcon.comBuy Melissa's book, The U.S. Constitution: A Comprehensive and Annotated Guide for the Modern ReaderBuy Leah's book, Lawless, now out in paperbackFollow us on Instagram, Threads, and BlueskyFor a transcript of an episode of Strict Scrutiny please email transcripts@crooked.com

1905 HOLES AND TAFTSupreme Court Rejects Postal Voting RegulationRichard Epstein discusses the Supreme Court's refusal to permit the U.S. Postal Service to implement new mail-in voting regulations ahead of federal elections. Justice Kavanaugh concurred, emphasizing that election administrators lack sufficient time and software systems to process millions of mail-in ballots without causing severe delays. Epstein criticizes the rule as an insidious abuse of government monopoly power, comparing selective ballot inspection to an unconstitutional poll tax. Epstein asserts that presidential efforts to bypass Congress and override state voting authorities breach constitutional separation of powers and fiduciary obligations owed to the public. (2)

1941 BRAZILBrazilian Election Scandal Shakes Supreme CourtMary Anastasia O'Grady reports Brazil's presidential campaign between incumbent Lula da Silva and Flavio Bolsonaro has tightened significantly amidst mounting financial and judicial scandals. Flavio Bolsonaro initially suffered in polling after soliciting movie funding from jailed banker Daniel Vorcaro of collapsed Banco Master. However, police investigations revealed text messages from Vorcaro seeking advice from Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, whose wife received a $25 million contract with Banco Master. Moraes previously led efforts to vacate Lula's conviction and silence political opponents. Exposure of judicial influence peddling leaves conflicted voters facing a critical October runoff. (3)

September 16, 2026A US District Judge refused to perist the Kennedy Center board to return Trump's name to the building's facade, The board promptly appealed, and voted to close the venue for two years, Rep. Joyce Beatty of Florida, an ex-officio member of the board, confroted Trump, Panic is spreading over oil prices, Revelations about the Iran War continue to be published, from reports of extensive damage to US bases in the Middle East to the cost of the war, Thomas Massie introduced eight counts of impeachement against Defense Secretary Hegseth, Trump expressed anger that his three hand-picked appointees to the Supreme Court did not support his rule to allow the USPS to screen mail-in ballots.       Watch today's recording here: https://www.youtube.com/live/g9TUa1Rwd6U?si=T8_KKcHQZElhpnZ-Get full, free access to Letters from an American here: https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/subscribeYou can also find me:Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/hcrichardson.bsky.socialInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/heathercoxrichardson/?hl=enFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/heathercoxrichardson/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@heathercoxrichardson                                             Get full access to Letters from an American at heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/subscribe

The New Yorker staff writer Joshua Rothman joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss recent calls from industry leaders to slow the development of A.I. technology for safety reasons. They talk about an industry-wide fear that A.I. could disrupt or even end human life within a decade, what an A.I.-related extinction event might look like, and whether the people developing the technology can be trusted to play a role in regulating it. They also explore recent incidents involving A.I. models going “rogue” and the difficulty of making increasingly capable autonomous systems trustworthy and controllable. This week's reading: “The Long Doomsday of A.I.,” by Joshua Rothman “My Weekend with an A.I. Agent,” by Brady Brickner-Wood The Political Scene draws on the reporting and analysis found in The New Yorker for lively conversations about the big questions in American politics. Join the magazine's writers and editors as they put into context the latest news—about elections, the economy, the White House, the Supreme Court, and much more. New episodes are available three times a week.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Those concerned that the Trump administration will interfere with the upcoming midterm elections can breathe a little easier this week, as the Supreme Court threw out their plan to have the Post Office muck up mail-in voting. But are we out of the woods yet?Guest: Ari Berman, Mother Jones' national voting rights correspondent.Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.Podcast production by Evan Campbell, Madeline Thames-Ducharme and Patrick Fort.Paige Osburn is the senior supervising producer of What Next and What Next TBD. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Why was Macklemore removed from Ed Sheeran's tour — and who made the decision? Today, we break down the tour drama, why the other artists started pulling out, and the free speech and First Amendment questions surrounding it. We also unpack the eight articles of impeachment filed against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the Supreme Court's latest ruling on mail-in ballots, the FBI's new hiring standards and automatic disqualification changes, plus the latest on the Lindsay Clancy holdout juror, Quick Hitters, Rumor Has It and more. Get the facts, without the spin. UNBIASED offers a clear, impartial recap of US news, including politics, elections, legal news, and more. Hosted by lawyer Jordan Berman, each episode provides a recap of current political events plus breakdowns of complex concepts—like constitutional rights, recent Supreme Court rulings, and new legislation—in an easy-to-understand way. No personal opinions, just the facts you need to stay informed on the daily news that matters. If you miss how journalism used to be, you're in the right place. In today's episode: Ed Sheeran & Macklemore Tour Drama (0:55) Supreme Court Mail-In Ballot Ruling (14:18) Hegseth Impeachment Articles + House Leaves Early (~20:45) FBI Changes Automatic Hiring Disqualifiers (~28:32) Lindsay Clancy Holdout Juror Speaks Out (~41:05) Quick Hitters (~42:37) Rumor Has It: Vaccine-Autism Researcher + Trump Jr.'s Wedding (~50:25) Critical Thinking Segment (~54:53) ⁠Watch⁠ this episode on YouTube. Follow Jordan on ⁠Instagram⁠ and ⁠TikTok⁠. All sources for this episode can be found ⁠here.⁠  Scammers are everywhere! But they can't harm you, if they can't find you! Use code JORDAN at https://incogni.com/jordan and get 60% off an annual plan! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

One of President Donald Trump's main policies regarding the midterm elections has been revoked by the Supreme Court. Power is going back to the states. The decision wasn't made based on the legality of the challenged presidential order, however, but instead because it would allegedly be too difficult to implement before the coming elections.We'll discuss this topic and others, in this episode of Crossroads.Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Those concerned that the Trump administration will interfere with the upcoming midterm elections can breathe a little easier this week, as the Supreme Court threw out their plan to have the Post Office muck up mail-in voting. But are we out of the woods yet?Guest: Ari Berman, Mother Jones' national voting rights correspondent.Want more What Next? Subscribe to Slate Plus to access ad-free listening to the whole What Next family and across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.Podcast production by Evan Campbell, Madeline Thames-Ducharme and Patrick Fort.Paige Osburn is the senior supervising producer of What Next and What Next TBD. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss whether this week's Supreme Court intervention rejecting Trump's mail-in ballot restrictions will prevent midterm chaos, explore the fast-evolving dynamics of public and political anxieties about AI, and dissect remarkable new reporting from ProPublica exposing the Putin-adjacent Russian oligarch who paid for much of Donald Trump Jr.'s private island wedding.Here are this week's chatters: Emily: New podcast Examined: The Backfire Effect, by Josie Duffy Rice; Supremacy: How Rule by the Court Replaced Government by the People by Nikolas Bowie and Daphna Renan John: Wild Card with Rachel Martin (NPR): John Dickerson says doubt only helps to solidify his faith; Derek DelGaudio's In & Of Itself (Trailer on YouTube) (Streaming on Hulu); Linda Holmes for NPR: 'In & Of Itself' Is A Study Of Identity And Magic; AMORALMAN: A True Story and Other Lies by Derek DelGaudio David: Colin from Accounts on Paramount Plus; Daniel Wu for The Washington Post: Pollution spikes after Trump halted global air-monitoring efforts, report says Listener chatter from Julian Ozen in Brooklyn, NY: Ordinary Abundance For this week's Slate Plus bonus episode, Emily, John, and David discuss what California Gov. Gavin Newsom told Jake Tapper about running for president in 2028. They discuss the signaling work of the fly-fishing tableau, what Newsom is really saying about Harris, and whether there's an appetite in the Democratic party for either of them to run. In the latest Gabfest Reads, David Plotz talks with John Lanchester about his new novel, Look What You Made Me Do, a darkly funny psychological thriller about two couples in modern-day London whose lives collide in a story of infidelity, obsession, and revenge. The book explores the performance of niceness, class, intergenerational frictions and how technology makes vengeance not just possible but almost exceedingly easy in the modern age. Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.) Podcast production by Nina Porzucki Research by Emily DittoYou can find the full Political Gabfest show pages here. Want more Political Gabfest? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Political Gabfest show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or visit slate.com/gabfestplus to get access wherever you listen. Find out more about David Plotz's monthly tours of Ft. DeRussy, the secret Civil War fort hidden in Rock Creek Park. Follow@SlateGabfest on X / https://twitter.com/SlateGabfestSlate Political Gabfest on Facebook / https://www.facebook.com/Gabfest/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

California’s November 2026 ballot carries one of the most consequential financial decisions in the state’s history. Marketed as a one-time 5% billionaire tax, Proposition 40 has drawn serious scrutiny from economists and policy researchers. Among those leading the charge in examining its true implications is Benjamin Jaros, a PhD economist and research fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution who specializes in public finance, financial economics, and economic history. On this episode of Christopher Lochhead: Follow Your Different, Benjamin Jaros broke down the realities of this proposed tax in ways that challenge the official narrative being sold to California voters. His research, along with that of his colleagues at Hoover, reveals a far more sweeping and dangerous policy than what is being advertised to the public. You're listening to Christopher Lochhead: Follow Your Different. We are the real dialogue podcast for people with a different mind. So get your mind in a different place, and hey ho, let's go.   Benjamin Jaros Explains Why This Is America’s First True Net Worth Tax Benjamin Jaros was careful to draw an important distinction when discussing the historical context of wealth taxation in America. While critics on the left point to 19th-century general property taxes as precedent, Jaros clarified that those taxes targeted tangible assets tied to land and physical structures. They ultimately failed to capture intangible assets as corporate incorporation rose in the early 20th century. What Prop 40 proposes is fundamentally different. It would tax an individual’s total net worth, meaning the value of everything you own, whether or not you have sold anything or received any financial gain. This makes it, as Jaros confirmed, the first true net worth tax in American history, a distinction that carries enormous consequences for how assets are legally treated in California.   The Constitutional Vulnerabilities Hidden Inside Prop 40 One of the most revealing parts of Benjamin Jaros’s research involves the serious constitutional challenges that Prop 40 is likely to face if passed. He identified multiple legal fault lines, starting with the retroactive residency clause, which would make the tax effective from January 1st of the previous year, even though voters would not approve it until November. Jaros noted that the bill’s own drafters included severability clauses, signaling they already knew this was a legal vulnerability. Beyond retroactivity, Jaros highlighted major concerns around California’s attempt to tax worldwide assets, including those held by foreign nationals living in the state. The Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution limits state taxing authority to what the federal government can also reach. California cannot extend its taxing power beyond what federal law permits, which creates significant legal exposure that will almost certainly result in Supreme Court litigation.   Why the “One-Time Billionaire Tax” Story Does Not Hold Up Benjamin Jaros and Christopher Lochhead both zeroed in on what may be the most critical detail buried inside Prop 40. Section 510 of the Billionaire Tax Act allows the California legislature to amend virtually any part of the act with a two-thirds vote, as long as the changes are deemed to further the purposes of the act. That language is broad enough to allow changes to the rate, the threshold, and even the one-time nature of the tax itself. This means that what is being sold as a limited, one-time measure on 200 billionaires could legally be expanded to cover far more Californians over time. Jaros pointed out that the state supreme court, which would adjudicate whether any amendments fall within the purposes of the act, is stacked with appointees who are broadly deferential to legislative decisions. The structural safeguards that voters might assume exist simply are not strong enough to prevent future expansion of this tax down to far lower wealth thresholds.   Bio Benjamin Jaros is an economist and research fellow at the Hoover Institution. He specializes in public finance, financial economics, and economic history, with a focus on federal, state, and local taxation. His recent research examines wealth taxation, budget scoring, taxpayer behavioral responses to income tax changes, state corporate income tax apportionment formula reforms, and colonial-era tobacco tariffs. He produces revenue estimates and fiscal impact analyses of state and federal tax policy. His research and commentary have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, and RealClearPolitics. He has previously worked at the Tax Foundation and served as a research assistant in academic, policy, and private-sector settings. Jaros received his BS in economics, magna cum laude, from Seton Hall University and his MA and PhD in economics from Clemson University.   Links Hoover Institute | Github | LinkedIn We hope you enjoyed this episode of Christopher Lochhead: Follow Your Different™! Christopher loves hearing from his listeners. Feel free to email him, connect on Facebook, X, LinkedIn, and subscribe on Apple Podcast / Spotify!

Joyce Vance and Barb McQuade answer listener questions on everything from Trump's White House ballroom to the insanity defense, and more. They discuss the Supreme Court's halt of construction without deciding its legality, Congress's unused power of the purse, limits of presidential immunity and the political risks of impeachment, why private carriers cannot replace the Postal Service for ballots, why Congress and voters are the key to restoring the rule of law, Trump's technical eligibility to serve as Speaker after leaving office, whether polygraphs are effective, and the two-part test for not guilty by reason of insanity.Freshen up your spring wardrobe!  Get the ReSIStance T-Shirt, Mini Tote, and other #SistersInLaw gear at politicon.com/merch! Additional #SistersInLaw Projects#SistersInLaw Main ShowJill's Politicon YouTube Show: Just The FactsKim'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. Order Barb's new book, The Fix, or her first book, Attack From Within, 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 #SistersOrder Barb's new book, The Fix, and get tickets for her book tour!Support This Week's Sponsors:Wild Grain: Get $30 off your first box and free croissants for life when you start your subscription to delicious quick-bake artisanal pastries, pasta, and bread at wildgrain.com/sisters with promo code: SISTERSOsea Malibu: Get your glow on with 10% off your first order of clean beauty products from OSEA Malibu when you go to oseamalibu.com and use promo code: SISTERS10Get 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

Michael Wolff and Joanna Coles look at Donald Trump's escalating battles with the Supreme Court, the collapse of the Kennedy Center under his control, and his increasingly aggressive response to the AI debate, where Trump has declared that “whoever wins AI wins” while threatening critics and accusing them of conspiracy. They also examine Trump's rollback of climate protections, his approach to conflict as a political strategy, and the extraordinary allegations surrounding Donald Trump Jr.'s wedding and its Russian connections. Plus, Trump's threat against Oman, the consequences of burning through missile supplies in Iran, Jared Kushner's transformation of American diplomacy into a business operation, and what a post-Trump administration could look like if Democrats make major gains in the midterms. #ad Unlock your best hair & skin with @iRestorelaser and HUGE savings on iRESTORE with code BEAST  at https://irestore.com/BEAST! #irestorepod  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

September 16, 2026 - 6am:Democratic Senators grill FBI director Kash Patel at hearingTrump blasts Supreme Court for vote by mail rulingTrump-appointed Kennedy Center board votes to shutter buildingBloomberg: Trump has made more trades than all of Congress combined3 Dead after news chopper crash in Los AngelesWSJ: U.S. is burning through its supply of interceptorsCBS News: Photos show damage at U.S. positionsAXIOS: Aging Congress attempts to regulate AI without using it 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.

The mail-in ballot saga has come to an end — for now. Mary and Andrew detail yesterday's Supreme Court decision rejecting President Trump's restrictions on mail-in voting, which they call “good news” in the fight against election interference. “Knock it off,” Andrew says to paraphrase the Supreme Court: “we are not engaging in this.” Then, the co-hosts delve into two more examples of what they consider attempts by government bodies to meddle in the midterms, the first being Missouri's failed redistricting effort as the Supreme Court rejects the state's new Trump-backed congressional district map. The second: the Solicitor General's emergency motion to stay an injunction on the Trump administration's SAVE database, urging the court to restore the immigration verification system that was blocked by a lower court. Plus, the prosecutor who led the “grand conspiracy” investigation into Trump's political enemies earlier this year has left the probe. And former CIA Director John Brennan preemptively goes to court ahead of the government's likely prosecution against him. A Note to Listeners: As the 2026 midterm elections heat up, MS NOW is headed to the Lone Star State. Join more than a dozen of your favorite hosts - including Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell, Jen Psaki, Michael Steele, Ali Velshi and more - in Arlington, Texas on September 26 for a day of community and conversation about the issues that matter most to you. Get your tickets at ms.now/together. 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.

Wednesday, September 16, 2026Today, the House Oversight Committee has voted to hold Epstein associate Leon Black in contempt for failing to appear pursuant to a subpoena; Trump lashes out at the Supreme Court after they shut down the USPS mail ballot portal scheme; a deal has been reached to sell Chicago's parking meters to an outside firm but only after they sell the ICE deportation fleet Omni Air; Senate Democrats block a cryptocurrency bill because it lacked safeguards against Trump enriching himself while in office; Trump is lashing out after a judge rules his name can't be put back on the Kennedy Center; Bari Weiss' 60 Minutes debut episode clocks the show's lowest ratings; plus Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You, HomeChef | For a limited time, get 50% off and free shipping for your first box PLUS free dessert for life! HomeChef.com/DAILYBEANS. Must be an active subscriber to receive free dessert.Blue Wave Nation | https://secure.actblue.com/donate/mswbluewave The Trump Epstein Memorial BookmobileThe Daily Beans is proud to partner with Miles Taylor and our friends at DEFIANCE.org For a limited time, members of the Daily Beans community can receive a FREE 3-month full membership to DEFIANCE.org and gain access to one of the fastest-growing pro-democracy movements in America. Join here: https://www.defiance.org/beansGuest: Kristen ClarkeGeneral Counsel for the NAACPNAACPCall 866-OUR-VOTE Hotline - Election Protection The Latest Breakdown →Trump's DOJ Just Blew Up Its Own Story In My LawsuitNew Unjustified →The Grand ConspiracyDiamond Dames → Diamond Dames - YouTube Diamond Dames - A Ted Lasso PodcastPatreon → The Daily Beans | PatreonStoriesHouse panel votes to hold Epstein associate Leon Black in contempt | NBC NewsTrump lashes out at Supreme Court after mail ballot loss | POLITICOKennedy Center Closes Its Doors Despite a Judge's Order | NYTDeal Reached to Sell Chicago Parking Meters to Investment Firm, Alderpeople Say | WTTWSenate blocks crypto regulation bill in a major blow to the industry | NBC NewsGood TroubleTennessee RacesD1- Kristi Burke, D2- Michaela For Tennessee, D5- Chaz Molder for Congress, D7- Darden Copeland For Congress, D9- Justin Pearson→Battleground Support Hub - Democrats.org →Get Out The Vote: Volunteer Info Session→Voter Registration Deadlines - Vote.org→Hands Off Our Vote! 2026 Toolkit | Indivisible→Help staff your local polling place - Power The Polls→Voter Registration Volunteer Opportunities · Mobilize→Helpline Orientation- Spanish Speakers Needed! - VoteRiders→Help save Texas from Ken Paxton! →NO HATE in WA State→Stand With Minnesota →iceout.org Good NewsICEBlockReedy Branch Review - Humanities | Pitt Community CollegeTexas Voter Registration Vote.orgMichanna Tate for South Carolina HouseDana Goldberg: Outrageous - Sep 23 - Den Theater - Chicago Dana Goldberg's Southwest FunnyFest Oct 9 - City of Albuquerque→Share your Good News & Good Trouble - The Daily Beans→Beans Talk audio -beans-talk.simplecast.comSubscribe to the MSW on YouTube - MSW Media - YouTubeOur Donation LinksThe Trevor Project - trevorproject.org/beansBlue Wave California - ActBlue.com/donate/msw-bwcDonate to Public Citizen - https://citizen.org/beans/National Security Counselors - Donate, WhistleblowerAid.org/beansDonate to It Gets Better / The Daily Beans FundraiserPathways to Citizenship - boomerang - pathways Dana and The Daily Beans support of Human Rights Campaign ONE CAUSE HRCThe Daily Beans supports It Gets BetterDr. Allison Gill - The Breakdown | Allison Gill, Mueller, She Wrote @muellershewrote.com - Bluesky, MSW & The Daily Beans Podcast @muellershewrote - Instagram, MSW Media - YouTube →Federal workers email AG - fedoath@pm.meDana Goldberg - Dana is on Patreon! At Dana's Dugout, @dgcomedy - Bluesky, @dgcomedy - IG, Dana Goldberg - Facebook, DanaGoldberg.comMore from MSW Media - Shows, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | Allison Gill Reminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:https://apple.co/3XNx7ckWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?https://patreon.com/thedailybeanshttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/https://apple.co/3UKzKt0 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.