Podcasts about united states constitution

This episode was recorded on June 12, 2025.It has been 236 years, 3 months, and one week since the United States Constitution came into effect on March 4th, 1789. The President of the United States has federalized the state militia of California and deployed it, along with the United States Marines, against the citizens of our country in Los Angeles. The Governor of Texas has deployed the Texas national guard against the citizens in that state. The governor and attorney general of georgia have threatened violence against its citizens. The speaker of the house of representatives this week stated that the governor of California needs to be tarred and feathered. And on Saturday, the wannabe dictator of our country is holding a North Korea style military parade on his birthday, against the wishes of the government of the city where it happens. Citizens across the nation are rising up against the violent, vengeful tactics of the trump regime against citizens and noncitzens alike, and it feels like we are approaching a breaking point. We've aksed Barbara F. Walter, one of the words leading experts on civil wars, violent extremism, and authoritarianism, and the author of “How Civil Wars Start” back on the show to help us understand where we are and where we may be going.

In a sweeping ruling and stern condemnation of Trump's violation of both the federal law AND the Constitution, a federal judge in California ruled that Trump must relinquish control of the California National Guard and return control to California Governor Gavin Newsom. However, the appeals court has issued a brief stay/pause on the ruling.In ruling against Trump, Judge Charles Breyer wrote: "At this early stage of the proceedings, the Court must determine whether the President followed the congressionally mandated procedure for his actions. He did not. His actions were illegal both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith." Glenn reviews Judge Breyer's ruling and his clever use of the Latin Tern "ipse dixit".If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support Glenn and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In a sweeping ruling and stern condemnation of Trump's violation of both the federal law AND the Constitution, a federal judge in California ruled that Trump must relinquish control of the California National Guard and return control to California Governor Gavin Newsom. However, the appeals court has issued a brief stay/pause on the ruling.In ruling against Trump, Judge Charles Breyer wrote: "At this early stage of the proceedings, the Court must determine whether the President followed the congressionally mandated procedure for his actions. He did not. His actions were illegal both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith." Glenn reviews Judge Breyer's ruling and his clever use of the Latin Tern "ipse dixit".If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support Glenn and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Unleashed: The Political News Hour with Susan Price – As we look back, we are reminded by the belief that history seems to repeat itself and we are also reminded by the remnants of past chaos and the ghosts who fought their way through darkness to create a sovereign alignment for the common man and the creation of the Bill of Rights and the United States Constitution 250 years ago...

There have been plenty of questions surrounding the constitutionality of the investigation into Bryan Kohberger, and especially surrounding how evidence was collected and tested at the scene of the crime and then in Pennsylvania.In this epsiode, we discuss the 4th Amendment and how it relates to Bryan Kohberger and his trial moving forward.The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution is as follows:"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."(commercial at 9:29)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:How DNA and Cell Phone Evidence in Idaho Murders Complied With the Fourth Amendment | The Heritage FoundationBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The same people that literally have rallies and marches for the so-called protection of the United States Constitution. Are now willing to throw out the values they have claimed to stand for, all because Trump says so? All because of a foreign nation, not anyone speaking ill of America, not anyone speaking negatively about Americans, just people protesting a foreign war that has nothing to do with us and that's all it took for the Republican Party to be done with the 1st Amendment.#1stamendment #constitution #republicanparty

United States Constitution, Article I, Section 8 provides:The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;Review the origins and debate over the authority to borrow money and hold debt as set forth in Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution.Understand how the Articles of Confederation provided that the debts incurred by the states and Congress would be honored, and paying down the debt was a critical reason for adopting the Constitution.  However, the Founding Fathers universally believed that the Congress under the Articles was incapable of paying the debt, and this weakness was a major reason for the calling of the Constitutional Convention.Learn how although the Constitutional Convention originally agreed that payment of the debts was mandatory and Congress would assume the debts of the States, those provisions were omitted in the Constitution. Instead, Article I, Section 8 vests the Congress with the power to borrow funds on the credit of the United States and to pay its debts. Discover how the Constitutional Convention originally agreed to create a constitutionally created Treasurer of the United States, and then agreed to eliminate the position.Review how Anti-Federalists attacked the debt power as destructive to American liberties.Explore how the debt provisions were essential to secure the good credit of the country, to repay creditors who funded the American Revolution and the Congress afterwards, and to ensure the security of the country in the future. Its abuse is to be kept in check by the reality that we elect the Congress that incurs the debt — they are accountable to We, The People.Highlights include the Constitutional Convention, Articles of Confederation, the New Jersey Plan, the Paterson Plan, the Paterson Resolutions, the Randolph Resolutions, the Randolph Resolves, the Virginia Plan, James Madison, Shays' Rebellion, Roger Sherman, Judge John Yates, Governor Edmund Randolph, Alexander Hamilton, Gunning Bedford, Jr., Elbridge Gerry, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Ellsworth, Governor Wiliam Livingston, Roger Sherman, Dr. William Samuel Johnson, Gouverneur Morris, United States Treasurer, Rhode Island Constitutional Convention, Edward Rutledge, Virginia Constitutional Convention, Anti-Federalists, Agrippa, Brutus, John DeWitt, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, House of Representatives, United States Senate, and more.To learn more about the Constitution & Patriot Week, visit www.PatriotWeek.org. Our resources include videos, a TV series, blogs, lesson plans, and more.Read the entire original, unamended Constitution here: https://patriotweek.org/2021/07/27/the-original-constitution-september-17/Check out Judge Michael Warren's book America's Survival Guide, How to Stop America's Impending Suicide by Reclaiming Our First Principles and History at Amazon or other major on-line retailers.Join us!

Recorded back in November, the Minister of Defense for the Black Panther Party talks rednecks and shares his time-tested wisdom with the current social revolutionary movement, warns us of past and coming challenges to our solidarity and solutions to overcome the divide-and-conquer tactics that have separated us for far too long. https://www.blackpantherpartywa.com/https://thepantherparty.com/www.instagram.com/bpp.waSpecial thanks to Nathan Evans Fox for his beautiful song.www.instagram.com/nathan.evans.foxThe Black Panthers Ten Point Program:1. We Want Freedom. We Want Power to Determine the Destiny of Our Black Community.We believe that Black people will not be free until we are able to determine our destiny.2. We Want Full Employment for Our People.3. We Want An End to the Robbery By the Capitalists of Our Black Community.We believe that this racist government has robbed us, and now we are demanding the overdue debt of forty acres and two mules. Forty acres and two mules were promised 100 years ago as restitution for slave labor and mass murder of Black people. 4. We Want Decent Housing Fit For The Shelter of Human Beings.5. We Want Education for Our People That Exposes The True Nature Of This Decadent American Society. We Want Education That Teaches Us Our True History And Our Role in the Present-Day Society.We believe in an educational system that will give to our people a knowledge of self. If a man does not have knowledge of himself and his position in society and the world then he has little chance to relate to anything else.6. We Want All Black Men To Be Exempt From Military Service.We believe that Black people should not be forced to fight in the military service to defend a racist government that does not protect us. 7. We Want An Immediate End to Police Brutality and the Murder of Black People.We believe we can end police brutality in our Black community by organizing Black self-defense groups that are dedicated to defending our Black community from racist police oppression and brutality. The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States gives a right to bear arms. We therefore believe that all Black people should arm themselves for self-defense.8. We Want Freedom For All Black Men Held in Federal, State, County and City Prisons and Jails.We believe that all Black People should be released from the many jails and prisons because they have not received a fair and impartial trial.9. We Want All Black People When Brought to Trial To Be Tried In Court By A Jury Of Their Peer Group Or People From Their Black Communities, As Defined By the Constitution of the United States.We believe that the courts should follow the United States Constitution so that Black people will receive fair trials. The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution gives a man a right to be tried by his peer group. A peer is a person from a similar economic, social, religious, geographical, environmental, historical, and racial background. To do this the court will be forced to select a jury from the Black community from which the Black defendant came. We have been, and we are being, tried by all-White juries that have no understanding of the “average reasoning man” of the Black community.10. We Want Land, Bread, Housing, Education, Clothing, Justice And Peace.When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature's God entitle them, a decent respect of the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.#BlackPanthers #history #YoungPatriots #FredHampton #redneck #countrymusic #politics #police #racism #ice #democrats #republican #foxnews #workingclass #chicago #aoc #berniesanders #trump

The United States Constitution mandates that a nationwide census is conducted every decade. Other nations also conduct censuses. Censuses are common. Our parsha begins with a nation-wide census, the third census since the Exodus. But this census was highly uncommon. It was conducted completely differently than the way that any other census is done. When […]

The United States Constitution mandates that a nationwide census is conducted every decade. Other nations also conduct censuses. Censuses are common. Our parsha begins with a nation-wide census, the third census since the Exodus. But this census was highly uncommon. It was conducted completely differently than the way that any other census is done. When we probe the matter deeply we discover something absolutely profound. At the risk of over-promising, I highly recommend that you listen very intently to this parsha podcast. It will change your life.– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –DONATE: Please consider supporting the podcasts by making a donation to help fund our Jewish outreach and educational efforts at https://www.torchweb.org/support.php. Thank you!– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –Email me with questions, comments, and feedback: rabbiwolbe@gmail.com– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –SUBSCRIBE to my Newsletterrabbiwolbe.com/newsletter– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –SUBSCRIBE to Rabbi Yaakov Wolbe's PodcastsThe Parsha PodcastThe Jewish History PodcastThe Mitzvah Podcast This Jewish LifeThe Ethics PodcastTORAH 101 ★ Support this podcast ★

This conversation provides a comprehensive overview of constitutional law, focusing on the separation of powers, checks and balances, and landmark Supreme Court cases. It emphasizes the importance of understanding these principles for law students and highlights ongoing debates regarding executive power and the role of the judiciary.This conversation serves as the first lecture in a series on Constitutional Law, specifically focusing on the structure of the U.S. government. It introduces the fundamental principles of the Constitution, including its historical context and the concept of Constitutional Law. The lecture then outlines the three branches of government—Legislative, Executive, and Judicial—as defined by the Constitution. A key focus is the doctrine of separation of powers and the interconnected system of checks and balances designed to prevent any single branch from becoming too powerful. Finally, the lecture discusses landmark Supreme Court cases that have interpreted and shaped our understanding of these structural principles.TakeawaysConstitutional Law is primarily derived from the United States Constitution. Its fundamental role is to govern the relationships between the branches of government, between the federal government and the states, and between the government and individuals.The U.S. Constitution was drafted in 1787 and ratified in 1788, taking effect in 1789. It replaced the Articles of Confederation.The Preamble outlines the foundational purposes and guiding values of the Constitution, such as forming a more perfect union, establishing justice, and securing the blessings of liberty.The doctrine of separation of powers refers to the division of governmental functions into three distinct branches: the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches.The two chambers of the U.S. Congress are the House of Representatives and the Senate. Article One of the Constitution governs the Legislative Branch.The Necessary and Proper Clause gives Congress the authority to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution its enumerated powers. This clause has been a source of debate regarding the scope of federal legislative authority.Key powers of the President include serving as Commander-in-Chief, making treaties with Senate consent, appointing federal officers and judges, and ensuring that the laws are faithfully executed.Congress can override a President's veto power by a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.The principle of judicial review was established in Marbury v. Madison. It means that the Supreme Court has the power to interpret the Constitution and federal law and to invalidate laws or executive actions that are inconsistent with the Constitution.The Supreme Court struck down the legislative veto in INS v. Chadha because it violated the separation of powers by circumventing the constitutional requirements for legislative action, specifically bicameralism (passage by both houses) and presentment (submission to the President).The Constitution sets up three distinct branches: legislative, executive, and judicial.These branches interact through a system of checks and balances to prevent any one branch from dominating.Landmark cases like Marbury, Youngstown, Chadha, Clinton, and Mistretta illustrate how these principles work in practice.The system is dynamic, with ongoing debates about the balance of power, especially regarding executive authority.Understanding these concepts is fundamental for legal analysis in any area of law involving government.The separation of powers framework is designed to prevent tyranny but can lead to gridlock.The judiciary's role in interpreting laws can lead to debates about judicial activism versus restraint.The administrative state raises questions about accountability and the delegation of power.The balance of power has shifted towards the executive branch over time, raising concerns.

This lecture explores the foundational framework of the United States Constitution, focusing on the separation of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. It discusses the key powers and functions of each branch, the system of checks and balances, landmark Supreme Court cases, and contemporary debates surrounding the constitutional framework.TakeawaysConstitutional law is derived from the United States Constitution.The Constitution serves as the supreme law of the land.The separation of powers divides government functions into three branches.Each branch operates independently but is interconnected through checks and balances.Congress is the legislative branch closest to the people.The President has significant powers, including veto authority.The judiciary interprets the Constitution and federal law.Judicial review is a key principle established by Marbury v. Madison.Impeachment serves as a check on federal officials, including the President.Contemporary debates focus on the efficiency and power dynamics within the government.Constitutional Law is primarily derived from the United States Constitution. Its fundamental role is to govern the relationships between the branches of government, between the federal government and the states, and between the government and individuals.The U.S. Constitution was drafted in 1787 and ratified in 1788, taking effect in 1789. It replaced the Articles of Confederation.The Preamble outlines the foundational purposes and guiding values of the Constitution, such as forming a more perfect union, establishing justice, and securing the blessings of liberty.The doctrine of separation of powers refers to the division of governmental functions into three distinct branches: the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches.The two chambers of the U.S. Congress are the House of Representatives and the Senate. Article One of the Constitution governs the Legislative Branch.The Necessary and Proper Clause gives Congress the authority to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution its enumerated powers. This clause has been a source of debate regarding the scope of federal legislative authority.Key powers of the President include serving as Commander-in-Chief, making treaties with Senate consent, appointing federal officers and judges, and ensuring that the laws are faithfully executed.Congress can override a President's veto power by a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.The principle of judicial review was established in Marbury v. Madison. It means that the Supreme Court has the power to interpret the Constitution and federal law and to invalidate laws or executive actions that are inconsistent with the Constitution.The Supreme Court struck down the legislative veto in INS v. Chadha because it violated the separation of powers by circumventing the constitutional requirements for legislative action, specifically bicameralism (passage by both houses) and presentment (submission to the President).

This Day in Legal History: Arrival of Constitutional DelegatesOn May 14, 1787, delegates from several states began arriving in Philadelphia for what would become the Constitutional Convention, a pivotal moment in American legal history. Originally convened to revise the Articles of Confederation, the gathering quickly evolved into a full-scale effort to draft a new framework of government. Only a handful of delegates were present on the 14th, but their arrival marked the start of weeks of foundational debate and compromise.The Convention was held at the Pennsylvania State House, now known as Independence Hall, a site already steeped in revolutionary significance. Delegates represented a range of political and economic interests, and their regional differences would shape much of the debate to come. The eventual goal was to create a system that balanced federal and state authority while preventing tyranny through a series of checks and balances.While May 14 was the scheduled opening, a quorum was not achieved until May 25, delaying formal proceedings. Nonetheless, early arrivals used the time to strategize and lay the groundwork for proposals. Among them was James Madison, whose extensive preparation and later contributions earned him the title "Father of the Constitution."The Convention would ultimately produce the United States Constitution, replacing the Articles of Confederation and establishing the three branches of government. This foundational legal document remains the supreme law of the land, with its principles guiding American governance to this day.In a new analysis, the Tax Law Center critiques the House Ways and Means Committee's proposal to expand the section 199A pass-through business income deduction, calling it a costly move that deepens existing inequities in the tax code. Originally enacted under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, section 199A allows qualifying owners of pass-through businesses to deduct up to 20% of their income. This benefit is already skewed heavily toward the top 1% of earners and industries such as law and lobbying. The provision, which expires after 2025 under current law, has not shown evidence of boosting economic activity and has instead encouraged tax avoidance strategies.The new proposal would raise the deduction rate from 20% to 23% and remove the income cap that currently limits eligibility for higher earners in certain industries. This change would particularly benefit high-income professionals whose pass-through income makes up a large share of their earnings. For example, under the proposed rules, a law firm partner earning $247,300 could receive a deduction of nearly $20,000—whereas they would get nothing under current 2025 law.The revised rules would also alter how phase-outs are calculated, increasing the value of the deduction for top earners while reducing it for some taxpayers whose income includes a mix of wages and pass-through business earnings. The analysis warns that these changes may incentivize further reclassification of income to exploit the deduction. Additionally, the proposal extends the favorable treatment to interest income received through Business Development Companies (BDCs), providing a new tax break for certain investment structures favored by private funds.Ways and Means proposes making costly 199A “pass-through” deduction more generous and valuable to high-income earnersHarvard University has broadened its lawsuit against the federal government, escalating a legal dispute over the termination of billions in federal funding. The amended complaint, filed in federal court in Boston, follows a new wave of agency letters formally cutting off $450 million in grants and reaffirming the earlier freeze of over $2.2 billion. The government attributes the funding halt to Harvard's alleged failure to address antisemitic incidents on campus.Harvard argues that the funding freeze is an unconstitutional retaliation for its refusal to cede academic control to federal authorities. The university maintains that these actions violate its First Amendment rights, particularly in relation to academic freedom and decision-making in areas like faculty hiring and student admissions. The complaint asserts that the administration is effectively punishing Harvard for not aligning with its political and ideological expectations.The dispute has wide-ranging implications, threatening numerous research initiatives and sectors dependent on Harvard's federal support. Agencies including the NIH, USDA, DOE, DOD, and HUD have all issued letters stating the university's recent conduct undermines federal priorities, leaving no room for corrective action.Harvard President Alan Garber has condemned the funding cuts as political overreach, warning they jeopardize core institutional freedoms. Meanwhile, a federal task force countered with a public rebuke of Harvard's leadership, accusing it of fostering discrimination and failing to protect Jewish students.A hearing in the case is scheduled for July 21.Harvard Expands Lawsuit Against US as Funding Feud Deepens (1)A Los Angeles judge resentenced Erik and Lyle Menendez to 50 years to life in prison with the possibility of parole, replacing their original sentence of life without parole for the 1989 murder of their parents. The decision followed emotional testimony from family members, former prison officials, and a rehabilitated inmate who credited the brothers with his transformation. Judge Michael Jesic noted that while the crime was shocking, the brothers' prison records and support from correctional staff and victims' relatives were extraordinary, calling the case a “unicorn.”The Menendez brothers are now immediately eligible for parole, with a hearing scheduled for June 13. Their attorney, Mark Geragos, said the new sentence reflects evolving views on incarceration and rehabilitation. During the hearing, both brothers expressed remorse and outlined plans for continued advocacy if released—Lyle focusing on prison rehabilitation through green spaces, and Erik on hospice programs for elderly inmates.The resentencing aligns with the position of former L.A. District Attorney George Gascón, who had supported a review of their case based on claims of childhood sexual abuse and their youth at the time of the crime. However, current DA Nathan Hochman opposed the change, questioning the brothers' remorse and pointing to a moderate risk assessment in related clemency proceedings.Prosecutors also scrutinized the brothers' past trial conduct, alleging they encouraged perjury and had not been truthful about the events surrounding the murder. Despite this, their family members testified they felt safe around Erik and Lyle both before and after the killings and urged an end to the decades-long public scrutiny.Menendez Brothers Given Chance of Parole With New Sentence (3)Wisconsin Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of obstructing proceedings and concealing a person from arrest. The charges stem from an April 18 incident in which Dugan allegedly helped an undocumented immigrant, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, avoid immigration agents by allowing him to leave through a restricted jury door near her courtroom. The agents, who lacked a judicial warrant, were waiting to detain him outside the courthouse.Dugan was arrested on April 25 and has since been temporarily suspended from her judicial duties by the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Her legal team maintains that she is innocent and expects to be exonerated during court proceedings. The case raises questions about the limits of judicial discretion when intersecting with federal immigration enforcement.Wisconsin judge indicted on obstructing immigration case | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this episode, we review the renewal of the covenant and will examine three of the four foundational pillars of a covenant/constitution.  What are these three essential pillars and how are they also to be found in our own United States Constitution?  This explains some of these aspects.

The Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution holds some of the most treasured rights held by Americans.  This includes the rights of free speech, religion, assembly, due process, and protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, and self incrimination.  However, there are other parts to the bill of rights. Parts that don't get quite as much as attention.  Learn more about the Third Amendment and why it was put into the Constitution on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily. Sponsors Newspapers.com Get 20% off your subscription to Newspapers.com Mint Mobile Cut your wireless bill to 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com/eed Quince Go to quince.com/daily for 365-day returns, plus free shipping on your order! Stitch Fix Go to stitchfix.com/everywhere to have a stylist help you look your best Tourist Office of Spain Plan your next adventure at Spain.info  Stash Go to get.stash.com/EVERYTHING to see how you can receive $25 towards your first stock purchase and to view important disclosures. Subscribe to the podcast!  https://everything-everywhere.com/everything-everywhere-daily-podcast/ -------------------------------- Executive Producer: Charles Daniel Associate Producers: Austin Oetken & Cameron Kieffer   Become a supporter on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/everythingeverywhere Update your podcast app at newpodcastapps.com Discord Server: https://discord.gg/UkRUJFh Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/everythingeverywhere/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/everythingeverywheredaily Twitter: https://twitter.com/everywheretrip Website: https://everything-everywhere.com/  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This Day in Legal History: Petition of RightOn May 8, 1628, the English Parliament formally presented the Petition of Right to King Charles I, marking a key moment in the development of constitutional law and the rule of law in England. This pivotal document emerged in response to growing discontent over the king's use of extrajudicial practices—most notably, the levying of taxes without Parliament's approval and the imprisonment of individuals without cause. Parliament asserted that such actions violated established legal norms rooted in Magna Carta and the common law. The Petition of Right articulated four principal grievances: non-Parliamentary taxation, arbitrary imprisonment, the quartering of soldiers in private homes, and the imposition of martial law during peacetime.Rather than draft new laws, Parliament framed the Petition as a reaffirmation of ancient liberties, underscoring that even the monarch was not above the law. Although Charles initially resisted, political pressure forced him to accept the Petition—though he would later undermine its principles, contributing to the constitutional crises that led to the English Civil War. The Petition became a foundational text in the Anglo-American legal tradition, influencing later legal milestones such as the English Bill of Rights (1689) and the United States Constitution.Its insistence on due process, the separation of powers, and limits on executive authority laid early groundwork for modern democratic governance. In rejecting the idea that the king could rule by prerogative alone, the Petition of Right helped to establish Parliament's role as a co-equal branch of government. The document continues to be cited in legal and political discourse as a seminal assertion of civil liberties. It was a bold challenge to monarchical absolutism at a time when questioning royal authority was fraught with danger. Through its articulation of legal limits on state power, the Petition of Right remains a cornerstone in the long evolution of constitutional democracy.Jenner & Block continues to take on high-profile legal battles against the Trump administration while awaiting a ruling in its own lawsuit challenging one of Trump's executive orders. The firm recently filed a suit in Massachusetts federal court on behalf of universities challenging cost caps imposed by the National Science Foundation on federally funded research. This is one of several legal actions Jenner has brought since Trump's return to the presidency, including lawsuits over restrictions on gender-affirming care and funding cuts to scientific research.Jenner is also seeking to permanently block a Trump executive order that targets the firm due to its ties to Andrew Weissmann, a former partner involved in the Mueller investigation. A judge has already temporarily blocked parts of the order, and other firms like Perkins Coie have secured similar rulings. Critics worry these orders could deter law firms from opposing the administration for fear of retaliation.Jenner is collaborating with former Solicitor General Paul Clement and his firm Clement & Murphy in its newest lawsuit on behalf of major research universities. They've previously teamed up to challenge medical research funding cuts, winning a preliminary court victory. Clement is also representing WilmerHale in its legal fight against Trump. The core argument in these cases is that the administration's actions infringe on constitutional rights, including free speech, due process, and equal protection.Jenner Adds Trump Fights While Fending Off Executive Order (1)The EPA under the second Trump administration is making Superfund site cleanups a central priority, aiming to accelerate remediation efforts across over 1,300 contaminated locations nationwide. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin emphasized a push for expedited timelines and tangible outcomes, positioning Superfund cleanups as visible and community-focused work that garners public support. The administration has highlighted early actions like major soil removals, enforcement efforts that secured nearly $300 million in cleanups, and the removal of four sites from the Superfund National Priorities List.Observers say this mirrors the Trump EPA's first term, which also emphasized efficiency and redevelopment of polluted sites, often encouraging private investment. However, budget constraints remain a challenge. Superfund appropriations have dropped significantly since 1999, and while the 2021 Infrastructure Act provided a temporary funding boost and reinstated taxes on chemical companies, the current administration's 2026 budget proposes a $254 million cut, claiming tax revenue will suffice.Industry groups oppose the chemical tax, while environmental experts warn that funding and staffing shortfalls could stall progress. Critics caution that setting aggressive timelines without sufficient resources could backfire, leading to missed goals and wasted efforts. To improve the program, experts suggest reforms such as more collaboration with local entities and clearer guidance on common cleanup approaches to reduce delays.Trumps' EPA Shifts to Make Superfund Cleanups a Central MissionFormer Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has retired from the law firm Paul Weiss to take on a leadership role at Columbia University, where he was elected co-chair of the board of trustees. Johnson, who served under President Obama and spent four decades at Paul Weiss, said he will miss his colleagues but is ready for the new challenge. His departure comes amid tensions between both Paul Weiss and Columbia with the Trump administration.Earlier this year, Trump issued an executive order limiting Paul Weiss's access to federal agencies, citing its ties to a prosecutor from the Russia investigation. To resolve the issue, the firm agreed to provide $40 million in pro bono legal services aligned with the administration's goals—a move criticized by some legal professionals for not challenging the order in court. Paul Weiss's chairman defended the agreement as necessary to protect the firm's future.Columbia University has also faced pressure from the Trump administration, which cut $400 million in federal funding over allegations that the school failed to address antisemitism on campus. In response, Columbia has made concessions to regain funding and recently laid off nearly 180 researchers due to financial strain. The university continues to operate without a permanent president following protests over the Israel-Gaza conflict.Johnson, a known critic of Trump's immigration policies and supporter of Kamala Harris in 2024, becomes the second high-profile departure from Paul Weiss following the firm's controversial deal with the administration.Ex-Obama cabinet secretary leaves law firm Paul Weiss for Columbia post | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Washington ends the Convention with an epic drinking party before heading home. The proposed Constitution is taken to New York where the Confederation Congress has to decide what to do with it. Blog ⁠https://blog.AmRevPodcast.com⁠ includes a complete transcript, as well as more resources related to this week's episode. Book Recommendation of the Week: ⁠The Framers' Coup: The Making of the United States Constitution, by Michael Klarman Online Recommendation of the Week: Franklin closing speech to the convention: https://archive.csac.history.wisc.edu/assessments_64.pdf Join American Revolution Podcast on Reddit: ⁠https://www.reddit.com/r/AmRevPodcast⁠ Ask your American Revolution Podcast questions on Quora: ⁠https://amrevpod.quora.com⁠ Join the Facebook group, American Revolution Podcast: ⁠https://www.facebook.com/groups/132651894048271⁠ Follow the podcast on X ⁠@AmRevPodcast⁠ Join the podcast mail list: ⁠https://mailchi.mp/d3445a9cd244/american-revolution-podcast-by-michael-troy ⁠ ARP T-shirts and other merch: ⁠https://merch.amrevpodcast.com⁠ Support this podcast on Patreon ⁠https://www.patreon.com/AmRevPodcast⁠ or via PayPal ⁠http://paypal.me/AmRevPodcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Voters today take for granted their right to elect their United States Senators. Americans have been directly electing their Senators for over a hundred years, but it wasn't always this way. Our Founding Fathers believed that allowing state legislatures to elect Senators would strengthen the bond between the federal and state governments. Article I, Section 3 of the United States Constitution stated, 'The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.'

One of the main rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution is "Freedom of Religion".  Although there were numerous drivers behind guaranteeing that right, few played a more important role than the "Test Acts".  Watch this weeks episode of Revolutionary War Rarities as we welcome author Avellina Balestri. Revolutionary War Rarities is the podcast from the Sons of the American Revolution.

UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION Article 1 Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10We appreciate your support! Tune in for fresh episodes every week. Let's keep the conversation going,join our community, subscribe and grow with us!Support the showWelcome to 'Facts Or Nonsense Podcast,' where the past, present, and future converge in a symphony of discovery.

This Day in Legal History: Seventeenth AmendmentOn April 8, 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was officially ratified, transforming the way U.S. senators are selected. Prior to this amendment, senators were chosen by state legislatures, a system intended by the framers to preserve state influence within the federal government. However, by the late 19th and early 20th centuries, this process had become widely criticized for being undemocratic and vulnerable to corruption, deadlocks, and backroom political deals.Progressive Era reformers pushed for change, arguing that direct election by the people would make senators more accountable and reduce the influence of powerful political machines. After years of public pressure and legislative debate, the Seventeenth Amendment was passed by Congress in 1912 and ratified by the necessary number of states the following year.The amendment mandates that senators be elected by the voters of each state, aligning the Senate more closely with democratic ideals already applied to the House of Representatives. It also established procedures for handling vacancies through temporary gubernatorial appointments followed by special elections.The ratification marked a major victory for advocates of electoral reform and remains one of the most significant changes to the structure of American democracy since the founding. It reshaped the relationship between the federal government and the people, moving power away from state political elites and toward the electorate.Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has launched an investigation into WK Kellogg over claims that the company may be misleading consumers by advertising some of its cereals as “healthy.” The probe focuses on popular products like Froot Loops, Apple Jacks, and Frosted Flakes, which the state alleges contain petroleum-based artificial colorings linked to health issues such as hyperactivity and obesity. Paxton criticized the company for continuing to use these dyes in U.S. products while removing them from versions sold in Canada and Europe. He argued that it is deceptive to market cereals containing such ingredients as healthy. WK Kellogg has not yet commented on the investigation.Texas opens probe into WK Kellogg over health claims | ReutersPresident Donald Trump has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to pause a federal judge's order requiring the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a legally present Salvadoran man who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador. The Justice Department argued that the lower court overstepped its authority and that the U.S. cannot guarantee swift results in international negotiations, especially under tight deadlines. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis had found no legal basis for Abrego Garcia's arrest or removal and ordered his return by 11:59 p.m. Monday, calling his deportation "wholly lawless."Abrego Garcia had previously won a 2019 court order protecting him from deportation due to threats from gangs in El Salvador. Despite this, he was deported on March 15 after being stopped and questioned by ICE. The administration claims he is affiliated with MS-13, but no charges have been filed, and his attorneys deny the allegation. The Supreme Court filing contends that while deporting him to El Salvador was a procedural error, the removal itself was lawful. The case is part of broader legal challenges to the Trump administration's aggressive immigration tactics and its attempts to sidestep judicial checks on deportation practices.Trump asks US Supreme Court to pause order to return man deported to El Salvador in error | ReutersA U.S. appeals court has blocked President Donald Trump from removing two Democratic members of federal labor boards, reversing a previous decision and restoring legal protections for their positions. The D.C. Circuit Court, in a 7-4 vote, reinstated lower court rulings that barred Trump from firing Gwynne Wilcox of the National Labor Relations Board and Cathy Harris of the Merit Systems Protection Board. The court reaffirmed long-standing laws that only allow such removals for neglect, malfeasance, or inefficiency—not at-will.Trump's administration argued that these protections infringe on presidential authority, and plans to appeal, potentially setting up a Supreme Court showdown. If the high court agrees to hear the case, it could revisit decades-old precedent that preserves agency independence, with potential ripple effects on bodies like the Federal Reserve and Federal Trade Commission.The judges noted that Wilcox and Harris's roles primarily involve adjudicating individual cases, not shaping executive policy, making them constitutionally protected from political dismissal. Without them, the boards would be paralyzed, with thousands of pending employee appeals left unresolved. This legal fight is part of Trump's broader effort to exert more control over independent federal agencies, a push that critics say threatens the checks and balances built into administrative law.US appeals court blocks Trump from removing Democrats from labor boards | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this episode of Revival Radio TV, Dr. Gene Bailey explores how the Magna Carta influenced both the laws that govern the United Kingdom and the creation of the United States Constitution. The Magna Carta was issued in June 1215 and was the first document to put into writing the principle that the king and his government were not above the law. Learn how different philosophies around these documents have influenced the views of people and how they interpret the modern U.S. Constitution.   RRTV_250330_RR

There have been plenty of questions surrounding the constitutionality of the investigation into Bryan Kohberger, and especially surrounding how evidence was collected and tested at the scene of the crime and then in Pennsylvania.In this epsiode, we discuss the 4th Amendment and how it relates to Bryan Kohberger and his trial moving forward.The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution is as follows:"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."(commercial at 9:29)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:How DNA and Cell Phone Evidence in Idaho Murders Complied With the Fourth Amendment | The Heritage FoundationBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

One of the genius aspects of the United States Constitution is the emphasis on protecting individual liberty.  The document protects liberty through separation of powers so power is not concentrated exclusively in any one branch.  To fulfill the desires of the people, the process through which national legislation is introduced begins on the floor of either the U.S. House or the U.S. Senate.  Today, we are talking about the process and procedures for legislation on the floor of the U.S. House.  To walk us through this sometimes confusing process, we are delighted to welcome former Virginia Congressman Robert Hurt. Congressman Hurt served in Congress for 6 years and is the former Dean of the Helms School of Government of Liberty University.

Patrick Henry is one of the most famous voices of the American Revolution. He was known in his own time for his powerful speeches and his unwavering commitment to liberty. But did you know that later in life, Patrick Henry opposed the United States Constitution? Did you know that during the political crisis of 1798/99, George Washington wrote to Patrick Henry and asked him to save the nation? In honor of the 250th anniversary of Patrick Henry's most famous speech, “Give Me Liberty, or Give Me Death,” award-winning historian John Ragosta joins us to investigate the life and work of Patrick Henry. John's Website | Book Show Notes: https://www.benfranklinsworld.com/403   RECOMMENDED NEXT EPISODES

The 250th birthday of the Declaration of Independence is coming up... do you have your own copy? Tune in to The Public Square® today to hear more. Get your own copy of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution here. Topic: Rediscovering American History The Public Square® with host Dave Zanotti thepublicsquare.com Air Date: Friday, March 21, 2025

Ukraine reacts with resignation to Russia attacking its infrastructure, hours after Vladimir Putin told President Trump he was halting such strikes.Also in the programme: we hear from a doctor in Gaza as attacks by Israel resume; and after a federal court rules that actions taken to shut down USAID by Elon Musk and DOGE 'likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways', we hear from the former White House counsel leading the charge.(IMAGE: View of a strike on a hospital, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Krasnopillia, Sumy Region, Ukraine, March 19, 2025 / CREDIT: State Emergency Service of Ukraine via Reuters)

Let me take you on a trip to the old country, back to 1843. Thats where our story today starts. Nestled in the Tennessee landscape is Old Dominick. This was an excellent episode with Clark. Hope you find value in it. And we have a coupon code to use you wanna buy a bottle for yourselfhttps://bit.ly/od-whiskey-shaman code: whiskeyshaman25Olddominick.comTexaswhiskeyfestival.comBadmotivatorbarrels.com/shop/?aff=3https://www.instagram.com/zsmithwhiskeyandmixology?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet&igsh=ZDNlZDc0MzIxNw==1843Domenico Canale is born in San Pietro di Rovereto on the Italian Riviera. A year after his birth, three of his mother's brothers leave for America, settling in Memphis, where they start a successful wholesale grocery business that includes liquor and wine.1859DOMENICO CANALE ARRIVES IN AMERICASixteen-year-old Domenico Canale sails for America, landing in New Orleans after a 65 day-long voyage. From there, he travels up the Mississippi to Memphis, Tennessee where he worked for his uncle, Abraham Vaccaro, running a modest fruit cart up and down the streets of Memphis.1866Canale formally establishes food wholesaler D. Canale & Co., and sets up operations in a warehouse at 8 Madison St. near Front. Among its offering is a whiskey, sold in ceramic jars and bottles, that Canale names Old Dominick.1880Canale develops the Dominick Toddy, a bourbon-based cordial with fruity overtones that must have spoken to the former fruit stand operator. It was described as the “one of which we are the proudest” and its label featured the now iconic Dominicker Rooster.1919Just three days before the ratification of the 18th Amendment to the United States Constitution, better known as Prohibition, Domenico Canale passes away at the age of 75 in his Midtown home.1921During Prohibition, Domenico's eldest son, John Dominick Canale, expanded D. Canale's food and product operations. With distribution up and down the Mississippi from Chicago to the Gulf of Mexico, as far east as Atlanta, and west into Indian Territory, it was one of the largest grocery distributors in the region.1933By the time Prohibition was repealed in 1933, D. Canale and Company was operating the largest refrigerated warehouses in Memphis, which caught the attention of Anheuser-Busch. Most beer at the time was unpasteurized and had to be refrigerated, as a result of their refrigeration and an established distribution footprint, D. Canale was awarded exclusive regional distribution rights for Anheuser-Busch beers.1965A young John D. Canale, Jr. becomes President of D. Canale following his father's untimely death. A graduate of Yale and a Lieutenant in the Navy, John D., known by many as “The Bear”, led D. Canale into some of its most prosperous years by diversifying into institutional food and banking. He conceived of the company bywords, “Quality Products, Quality Service, by Quality People,” which we remember to this day.1982John D. Canale Jr and his wife, Peggy, had two sons; John D. Canale III and Chris W. Canale. Planning for future generations, John D. Canale Jr. spun both the food business and the beer business out from under the parent company D. Canale and Company in 1982, thereby creating D. Canale Food Services, Inc., and D. Canale Beverages, Inc.1999After 125 years of continuous operation, D. Canale Food Services is sold. At the 125th Anniversary celebration, a grateful John D. Canale Jr. reminded his friends, family, customers, and the company's hundreds of employees that “Quality and Service are remembered long after the price is forgotten.” With the beverage industry trending towards craft beer, wine and spirits, the family sold D. Canale Beverages at its peak in 2010.

Birthright citizenship is established in the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution – yet Donald Trump's recent Executive Order 14160 denies some types of birthright citizenship. The Order contradicts over a century of American law, legal practice, and constitutional interpretation. Three groups have opposed the order as unconstitutional and challenged it in the courts: and cities, civil rights organizations, and labor organizations. In the podcast, three scholars to help Susan and Lilly interrogate the meaning of natural born citizenship, the political ramifications of Trump's order, and the complicated history of natural born citizenship in the United States. Dr. Anna O. Law is the Herbert Kurz Chair in Constitutional Rights and Associate Professor of Political Science at Brooklyn College, City University of New York. Julie Novkov is Dean of Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy and Professor of Political Science and Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, University at Albany, SUNY. Carol Nackenoff is the Emerita Richter Professor of Political Science, Swarthmore College Mentioned: Calvin's Case (1608) Donald Trump's Executive order 14160 Julie and Carol's 2021 book American by Birth: Wong Kim Ark and the Battle for Citizenship and their NBN interview with Susan. Anna's 2025 FREE open-access article “The Civil War and Reconstruction Amendments' Effects on Citizenship and Migration” Anna's NBN conversation with Heath Brown on her 2017 book, The Immigration Battle in American Courts Lilly's conversation with Martha Jones about her book, Birthright Citizens: A History of Race and Rights in Antebellum America Kate Masur, Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement, from Revolution to Reconstruction (2021) Lilly's NBN conversation with Elizabeth Cohen and Cyril Ghosh about their 2019 book Citizenship Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Birthright citizenship is established in the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution – yet Donald Trump's recent Executive Order 14160 denies some types of birthright citizenship. The Order contradicts over a century of American law, legal practice, and constitutional interpretation. Three groups have opposed the order as unconstitutional and challenged it in the courts: and cities, civil rights organizations, and labor organizations. In the podcast, three scholars to help Susan and Lilly interrogate the meaning of natural born citizenship, the political ramifications of Trump's order, and the complicated history of natural born citizenship in the United States. Dr. Anna O. Law is the Herbert Kurz Chair in Constitutional Rights and Associate Professor of Political Science at Brooklyn College, City University of New York. Julie Novkov is Dean of Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy and Professor of Political Science and Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, University at Albany, SUNY. Carol Nackenoff is the Emerita Richter Professor of Political Science, Swarthmore College Mentioned: Calvin's Case (1608) Donald Trump's Executive order 14160 Julie and Carol's 2021 book American by Birth: Wong Kim Ark and the Battle for Citizenship and their NBN interview with Susan. Anna's 2025 FREE open-access article “The Civil War and Reconstruction Amendments' Effects on Citizenship and Migration” Anna's NBN conversation with Heath Brown on her 2017 book, The Immigration Battle in American Courts Lilly's conversation with Martha Jones about her book, Birthright Citizens: A History of Race and Rights in Antebellum America Kate Masur, Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement, from Revolution to Reconstruction (2021) Lilly's NBN conversation with Elizabeth Cohen and Cyril Ghosh about their 2019 book Citizenship Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

Birthright citizenship is established in the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution – yet Donald Trump's recent Executive Order 14160 denies some types of birthright citizenship. The Order contradicts over a century of American law, legal practice, and constitutional interpretation. Three groups have opposed the order as unconstitutional and challenged it in the courts: and cities, civil rights organizations, and labor organizations. In the podcast, three scholars to help Susan and Lilly interrogate the meaning of natural born citizenship, the political ramifications of Trump's order, and the complicated history of natural born citizenship in the United States. Dr. Anna O. Law is the Herbert Kurz Chair in Constitutional Rights and Associate Professor of Political Science at Brooklyn College, City University of New York. Julie Novkov is Dean of Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy and Professor of Political Science and Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, University at Albany, SUNY. Carol Nackenoff is the Emerita Richter Professor of Political Science, Swarthmore College Mentioned: Calvin's Case (1608) Donald Trump's Executive order 14160 Julie and Carol's 2021 book American by Birth: Wong Kim Ark and the Battle for Citizenship and their NBN interview with Susan. Anna's 2025 FREE open-access article “The Civil War and Reconstruction Amendments' Effects on Citizenship and Migration” Anna's NBN conversation with Heath Brown on her 2017 book, The Immigration Battle in American Courts Lilly's conversation with Martha Jones about her book, Birthright Citizens: A History of Race and Rights in Antebellum America Kate Masur, Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement, from Revolution to Reconstruction (2021) Lilly's NBN conversation with Elizabeth Cohen and Cyril Ghosh about their 2019 book Citizenship Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Birthright citizenship is established in the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution – yet Donald Trump's recent Executive Order 14160 denies some types of birthright citizenship. The Order contradicts over a century of American law, legal practice, and constitutional interpretation. Three groups have opposed the order as unconstitutional and challenged it in the courts: and cities, civil rights organizations, and labor organizations. In the podcast, three scholars to help Susan and Lilly interrogate the meaning of natural born citizenship, the political ramifications of Trump's order, and the complicated history of natural born citizenship in the United States. Dr. Anna O. Law is the Herbert Kurz Chair in Constitutional Rights and Associate Professor of Political Science at Brooklyn College, City University of New York. Julie Novkov is Dean of Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy and Professor of Political Science and Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, University at Albany, SUNY. Carol Nackenoff is the Emerita Richter Professor of Political Science, Swarthmore College Mentioned: Calvin's Case (1608) Donald Trump's Executive order 14160 Julie and Carol's 2021 book American by Birth: Wong Kim Ark and the Battle for Citizenship and their NBN interview with Susan. Anna's 2025 FREE open-access article “The Civil War and Reconstruction Amendments' Effects on Citizenship and Migration” Anna's NBN conversation with Heath Brown on her 2017 book, The Immigration Battle in American Courts Lilly's conversation with Martha Jones about her book, Birthright Citizens: A History of Race and Rights in Antebellum America Kate Masur, Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement, from Revolution to Reconstruction (2021) Lilly's NBN conversation with Elizabeth Cohen and Cyril Ghosh about their 2019 book Citizenship Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

On this West Virginia Morning, educators across the state are bracing for federal cuts to education and wondering how to meet the new school discipline requirements lawmakers are weighing. Eric Douglas talks with the head of the West Virginia School Board Association.  Also, a look at what the United States Constitution says about women's rights.... View Article The post Bracing For Federal Education Cuts And Work To Be Done For Women's Equality, This West Virginia Morning appeared first on West Virginia Public Broadcasting.

Birthright citizenship is established in the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution – yet Donald Trump's recent Executive Order 14160 denies some types of birthright citizenship. The Order contradicts over a century of American law, legal practice, and constitutional interpretation. Three groups have opposed the order as unconstitutional and challenged it in the courts: and cities, civil rights organizations, and labor organizations. In the podcast, three scholars to help Susan and Lilly interrogate the meaning of natural born citizenship, the political ramifications of Trump's order, and the complicated history of natural born citizenship in the United States. Dr. Anna O. Law is the Herbert Kurz Chair in Constitutional Rights and Associate Professor of Political Science at Brooklyn College, City University of New York. Julie Novkov is Dean of Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy and Professor of Political Science and Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, University at Albany, SUNY. Carol Nackenoff is the Emerita Richter Professor of Political Science, Swarthmore College Mentioned: Calvin's Case (1608) Donald Trump's Executive order 14160 Julie and Carol's 2021 book American by Birth: Wong Kim Ark and the Battle for Citizenship and their NBN interview with Susan. Anna's 2025 FREE open-access article “The Civil War and Reconstruction Amendments' Effects on Citizenship and Migration” Anna's NBN conversation with Heath Brown on her 2017 book, The Immigration Battle in American Courts Lilly's conversation with Martha Jones about her book, Birthright Citizens: A History of Race and Rights in Antebellum America Kate Masur, Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement, from Revolution to Reconstruction (2021) Lilly's NBN conversation with Elizabeth Cohen and Cyril Ghosh about their 2019 book Citizenship Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Birthright citizenship is established in the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution – yet Donald Trump's recent Executive Order 14160 denies some types of birthright citizenship. The Order contradicts over a century of American law, legal practice, and constitutional interpretation. Three groups have opposed the order as unconstitutional and challenged it in the courts: and cities, civil rights organizations, and labor organizations. In the podcast, three scholars to help Susan and Lilly interrogate the meaning of natural born citizenship, the political ramifications of Trump's order, and the complicated history of natural born citizenship in the United States. Dr. Anna O. Law is the Herbert Kurz Chair in Constitutional Rights and Associate Professor of Political Science at Brooklyn College, City University of New York. Julie Novkov is Dean of Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy and Professor of Political Science and Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, University at Albany, SUNY. Carol Nackenoff is the Emerita Richter Professor of Political Science, Swarthmore College Mentioned: Calvin's Case (1608) Donald Trump's Executive order 14160 Julie and Carol's 2021 book American by Birth: Wong Kim Ark and the Battle for Citizenship and their NBN interview with Susan. Anna's 2025 FREE open-access article “The Civil War and Reconstruction Amendments' Effects on Citizenship and Migration” Anna's NBN conversation with Heath Brown on her 2017 book, The Immigration Battle in American Courts Lilly's conversation with Martha Jones about her book, Birthright Citizens: A History of Race and Rights in Antebellum America Kate Masur, Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement, from Revolution to Reconstruction (2021) Lilly's NBN conversation with Elizabeth Cohen and Cyril Ghosh about their 2019 book Citizenship Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jake Auchincloss is a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives for Massachusetts's 4th district. He assumed office on January 3, 2021. He is a member of the Democratic Party, and has served in the Marine Corps, being deployed to Afghanistan in 2012 and to Panama in 2014. On January 6, 2021, after the 2021 attack on the United States Capitol, Auchincloss tweeted his agreement with lawmakers' calls to remove President Donald Trump from office, either through the Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution or impeachment. Auchincloss voted to certify the results of the 2020 United States presidential election in the early morning of January 7, 2021.----------LINKS:https://auchincloss.house.gov/https://x.com/repauchinclosshttps://www.congress.gov/member/jake-auchincloss/A000148https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jake_Auchinclosshttps://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/12/Tv/video/jake-auchincloss-russia-ukraine----------SUPPORT THE CHANNEL:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/siliconcurtainhttps://www.patreon.com/siliconcurtain----------TRUSTED CHARITIES ON THE GROUND:Save Ukrainehttps://www.saveukraineua.org/Superhumans - Hospital for war traumashttps://superhumans.com/en/UNBROKEN - Treatment. Prosthesis. Rehabilitation for Ukrainians in Ukrainehttps://unbroken.org.ua/Come Back Alivehttps://savelife.in.ua/en/Chefs For Ukraine - World Central Kitchenhttps://wck.org/relief/activation-chefs-for-ukraineUNITED24 - An initiative of President Zelenskyyhttps://u24.gov.ua/Serhiy Prytula Charity Foundationhttps://prytulafoundation.orgNGO “Herojam Slava”https://heroiamslava.org/kharpp - Reconstruction project supporting communities in Kharkiv and Przemyślhttps://kharpp.com/NOR DOG Animal Rescuehttps://www.nor-dog.org/home/----------PLATFORMS:Twitter: https://twitter.com/CurtainSiliconInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/siliconcurtain/Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/4thRZj6NO7y93zG11JMtqmLinkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/finkjonathan/Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/siliconcurtain----------Welcome to the Silicon Curtain podcast. Please like and subscribe if you like the content we produce. It will really help to increase the popularity of our content in YouTube's algorithm. Our material is now being made available on popular podcasting platforms as well, such as Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

“A mythbusting episode,” Ross suggested. “Great idea!” Sam and Jeff said.Then we blinked, and we had gone off-topic again, taped an entire show about 19th-century American cultural hegemony. What a corker! More specifically, we had taped a show about the life and times of a long-dead American statesman who also happened to be a strong supporter of the 18th Amendment to the United States Constitution, a.k.a. Prohibition.Naw—that's an exaggeration. We wouldn't do that to you. This episode is about *20th-century* political hegemony. (Everything else above stands.)Still here? Good! Everything above is a fib, a gambit designed to root out the nonbelievers. Except the “mythbusting” part. Here's a myth for you: It's never important to read all the way to the end!This show changes format weekly, because squirrel. We call this format “IT IS VERY UNLIKELY THAT THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL WILL SUE US.”RELATED TRIVIA: Sam, Ross, and Jeff will all be at the Long Beach Grand Prix in April. Jeff will be working his day job with AWA Racing; Ross and Sam will just be hanging out. Sam will have a pocketful of free INTC stickers. And yes, that last sentence is a threat.This episode was produced by Mike Perlman.**Who We Are + Spicy Merch:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.ItsNotTheCar.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠**Support It's Not the Car:Contribute on Patreon ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.patreon.com/notthecar⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠**Topic suggestions, feedback, questions? Let us know what you think!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠INTCPod@gmail.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠**Check out Sam's book!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Smithology: Thoughts, Travels, and Semi-Plausible Car Writing, 2003–2023⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠**Where to find us:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/intcpod⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/thatsamsmith/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/j.v.braun/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/rossbentley/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://rossbentley.substack.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://speedsecrets.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠**ABOUT THE SHOW:It's Not the Car is a podcast about people and speed. We tell racing stories and leave out the boring parts.Ross Bentley is a former IndyCar driver, a bestselling author, and a world-renowned performance coach. Jeff Braun is a champion race engineer. Sam Smith is an award-winning writer and a former executive editor of Road & Track magazine.We don't love racing for the nuts and bolts—we love it for what it asks of the meatbag at the wheel.New episodes every Tuesday.

#podcast #politics #19thAmendment #Michigan #Voting #VotingRights #Constitution #WomensRights #Marriage #MAGA #Republicans #Democrats #progressives #leftoflansing Here's the Left of Lansing "Monday Musing" for March 10, 2025. The MAGA Michigan Republican Party is trying to pass a resolution to reach the state ballot in 2026 that would require proof of citizenship while registering to vote.  While this does nothing to fix a non-existent "voter fraud" problem, it does do one thing Republicans across the country want: to chip away at the 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution.  It's the White Christian Nationalist goal of ripping away the rights of women. Please, subscribe to the podcast, download each episode, and give it a good review if you can! leftoflansing@gmail.com Left of Lansing is now on YouTube as well! leftoflansing.com NOTES: "Battle lines drawn in fight over Michigan voter citizenship proposal." By Haley Harding of Votebeat (via Bridge Michigan) "Millions of married women voters could be disenfranchised under proposed federal law, opponents say." By Justin Engel of MLive.com

A completely incoherent Donald Trump got on Truth Social on Sunday to launch a lengthy attack on MSNBC after the network announced that they were parting ways with host Joy Ann Reid. But Trump went further than just attacking the hosts on the network and actually demanded that the company pay "vast sums of money" for the "unpardonable sins" they have committed. Those "sins" are calling out Trump's lies and telling the truth about what he's doing, which apparently in his mind means that he's owed money. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth admitted during an interview on Fox News that Donald Trump fired the top lawyers in the military so that there would be no one left to stand in his way and tell him "no." This is a dictator move, and it could be the telltale sign that Trump is preparing, at some point, to order the military to go against the United States Constitution. Whether it is for a foreign or domestic purpose remains to be seen, but smart money is on the latter.More and more local Republican leaders from across the country are warning that Donald Trump's mass layoffs and the termination of government contracts could lead to mass unemployment that would cripple local economies. Economists themselves are now warning of a looming recession thanks to all of the cuts that are taking place, as our economy simply cannot handle the sudden impact of tens of thousands of people being out of work in a single month. This is almost like the COVID layoffs all over again.The Trump administration has been forcing engineers throughout government agencies to scan through hundreds of thousands of documents on government websites to look for what are being called "banned words." These words include things like "woman" and "disabled" in the FDA database, while Health and Human Services is removing terms like "Biden", "transgender," and "diversity." This serves no purpose other than to attack vulnerable parts of society, as Farron explains.Text and and let us know your thoughts on today's stories!Subscribe to our YouTube channel to stay up to date on all of Farron's content: https://www.youtube.com/FarronBalancedFollow Farron on social media! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FarronBalanced Twitter: https://twitter.com/farronbalanced Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/farronbalanced TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@farronbalanced?lang=en

In this episode of Leadership and Legacy, historian, political analyst, and author Dr. Yuval Levin explores the foundations of American democracy, the qualities of effective presidential leadership, and the role of compromise in governance. Levin discusses how a successful presidency requires restraint over aggression and negotiation over conflict, drawing lessons from historical administrations. He also examines the United States Constitution, arguing that while it is not a flawless document, its strength lies in its ability to adapt and unite a divided nation. With the current state of political polarization and increasing concerns over constitutional integrity, Levin highlights why preserving democratic institutions is more critical than ever. Tune in to gain insights on leadership, political philosophy, governance, and the evolving role of the presidency in American history.Leadership and Legacy: Conversations at the George Washington Presidential Library is hosted by Washington Library Executive Director Dr. Lindsay Chervinsky. It is a production of the Mount Vernon Ladies' Association and Primary Source Media. For more information about this program, go to www.GeorgeWashingtonPodcast.com.

In this episode of Leadership and Legacy, historian, political analyst, and author Dr. Yuval Levin explores the foundations of American democracy, the qualities of effective presidential leadership, and the role of compromise in governance. Levin discusses how a successful presidency requires restraint over aggression and negotiation over conflict, drawing lessons from historical administrations. He also examines the United States Constitution, arguing that while it is not a flawless document, its strength lies in its ability to adapt and unite a divided nation. With the current state of political polarization and increasing concerns over constitutional integrity, Levin highlights why preserving democratic institutions is more critical than ever. Tune in to gain insights on leadership, political philosophy, governance, and the evolving role of the presidency in American history.Leadership and Legacy: Conversations at the George Washington Presidential Library is hosted by Washington Library Executive Director Dr. Lindsay Chervinsky. It is a production of the Mount Vernon Ladies' Association and Primary Source Media. For more information about this program, go to www.GeorgeWashingtonPodcast.com.

In the United States, an executive order is a directive by the president of the United States that manages operations of the federal government.[1] The legal or constitutional basis for executive orders has multiple sources. Article Two of the United States Constitution gives presidents broad executive and enforcement authority to use their discretion to determine how to enforce the law or to otherwise manage the resources and staff of the federal government's executive branch. The ability to make such orders is also based on expressed or implied Acts of Congress that delegate to the president some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation).[2] The vast majority of executive orders are proposed by federal agencies before being issued by the president.

On February 4, 2025, the South Dakota House debated and voted on SJR 502 (COS Action's Article V Resolution). The South Dakota Senate had previously approved the legislation by a strong majority. After a disappointing result, Regional Directors Andrew Lusch and Deanna Becket give their live reaction and a call to action. SJR 502 is a resolution "applying to the United States Congress for a convention of the states to propose amendments to the United States Constitution regarding the imposition of fiscal restraints on the federal government, further limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office for members of Congress and other federal officials."

What do Trump's executive orders do, and how do we fight them? On his first day in office as the 47th president of the United States, President Trump signed a slew of executive orders (EOs) that impact the LGBTQ+ community, as well as many others. It is important to note that executive actions do NOT have the authority to override the United States Constitution, federal statutes, or established legal precedent. Many of these directives do just that or are regarding matters over which the president does not have control. Given that, many of these orders will be difficult, if not impossible, to implement, and efforts to do so will be challenged through litigation. Currently, much is unknown about whether or how the administration or other actors will comply with these directives, and in most instances, rules will need to be promulgated, or significant administrative guidance will need to be issued in order for implementation to occur. These are processes that take time and require detailed additional plans to be developed. Today we talk to our friends Brandon Wolf, National Press Secretary of the Human Rights Campaign and journalist Christopher Kane.  We will discuss the specific anti-LGBTQ orders, what they mean, and how we collectively and individually can fight them.   With co-host Brody Levesque

This Day in Legal History: Poll Tax AbolishedOn January 23, 1964, the 24th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, marking a pivotal moment in the fight for civil rights and voting equality. This amendment abolished the use of poll taxes in federal elections, a practice that had long been used to disenfranchise low-income and minority voters, particularly African Americans. Poll taxes required individuals to pay a fee to vote, which many could not afford, effectively barring them from participating in the democratic process.The amendment's ratification was part of a broader civil rights movement aiming to dismantle systemic barriers to equality. Although the 15th Amendment prohibited racial discrimination in voting, mechanisms like poll taxes, literacy tests, and other discriminatory practices were used to suppress African American voters, especially in the South. The 24th Amendment directly confronted one of these tools of disenfranchisement, removing a significant obstacle to equal voting rights.Its passage was not universally supported and faced resistance from states that benefitted from voter suppression. However, the amendment signaled a growing federal commitment to civil rights reforms. Following its ratification, court cases like Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections in 1966 extended the prohibition of poll taxes to state elections, solidifying the impact of the amendment across all levels of government.The elimination of the poll tax was a vital step in creating a more inclusive democracy. It underscored the principle that access to voting should not depend on one's economic status, reinforcing the idea that the right to vote is fundamental and universal.President Trump's declaration of a national energy emergency, aimed at accelerating oil and gas projects, is expected to withstand legal challenges, according to experts. The order invokes the National Emergencies Act, granting broad presidential powers to expedite energy project approvals. Courts are unlikely to overturn the emergency designation due to the law's lack of a clear definition of “emergency” and historical judicial deference to such declarations. However, the order's implementation could face significant legal scrutinyThe directive requires federal agencies to identify laws and regulations that could streamline permitting for projects, including drilling, pipeline construction, and refining. Environmental statutes like the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act could be impacted, sparking concerns over weakened protections. Legal battles are anticipated over specific agency actions, such as regulatory rollbacks or lease approvals, rather than the emergency declaration itself. The involvement of the National Security Council in justifying regulatory changes may bolster the administration's defense in court, as judges often defer to national security claims. Environmental groups have criticized the move but are waiting to challenge concrete actions taken under the order. Market forces and industry strategies, such as energy companies' focus on shareholder returns, will also influence the pace of oil and gas production growth.Trump US energy emergency order should withstand court challenges | ReutersCornell University has filed lawsuits against AT&T and Verizon in federal court in Texas, alleging infringement of two patents related to Wi-Fi technology. The patents, granted to Cornell in 2010 and 2011, were developed by two engineering professors and involve innovations to improve Wi-Fi signal strength and efficiency in devices compatible with Wi-Fi 5 and Wi-Fi 6 standards. The university claims the telecom companies infringe these patents through the manufacture and sale of Wi-Fi-enabled products, including smartphones and routers.Cornell seeks monetary damages and injunctions to stop the alleged infringement. The cases are filed under separate docket numbers for AT&T and Verizon in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Both companies and the university have not provided immediate comments on the litigation.Cornell University sues AT&T, Verizon over Wi-Fi patents | ReutersFormer New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez has lost his bid for a new trial following his corruption conviction. Menendez argued that jurors improperly reviewed unredacted evidence during deliberations, which his defense team claimed unfairly linked him to accusations of accepting bribes in exchange for facilitating military aid to Egypt. U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein rejected the request, stating that the defense shared responsibility for not identifying the unredacted material and that it likely did not influence the jury's decision.The ruling clears the way for Menendez's sentencing next week, where prosecutors are seeking a 15-year prison term. Menendez, convicted on all 16 counts last July, including acting as an agent for a foreign government, allegedly accepted bribes such as gold, cash, and a luxury car in exchange for political favors, including aid to Qatar. Menendez's lawyers argue for a sentence of no more than 2¼ years. He served 18½ years in the Senate and previously chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.Former NJ senator Menendez loses bid for new trial after saying error tainted conviction | ReutersIn a piece I wrote for Forbes yesterday, I argue New Jersey's proposal to eliminate the 200-transaction threshold for economic nexus is a welcome step toward simplifying sales and use tax compliance. This outdated mechanism, derived from the Supreme Court's decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair, was intended to ensure out-of-state sellers contributed their fair share. However, it has created unnecessary burdens, especially for small businesses, which must navigate a labyrinth of state-specific rules for both revenue and transaction counts. The inconsistency across states adds to the complexity for remote sellers.New Jersey's approach to tie tax collection responsibility solely to gross revenue—requiring collection only for sellers exceeding $100,000—represents a smarter, more equitable model. It aligns taxation with actual economic impact and removes arbitrary transaction thresholds. This eliminates a glaring loophole where high-value but fewer transactions escape tax liability while lower-value, high-volume transactions bear the burden. Simplifying compliance frameworks in this way eases administrative challenges for businesses, particularly those lacking dedicated tax resources.On a broader scale, New Jersey's move highlights the need for uniformity in sales tax laws. The patchwork of state-specific thresholds creates barriers to interstate commerce and drives up compliance costs for sellers. A consistent revenue-only threshold nationwide would modernize tax systems to reflect the realities of e-commerce, replacing rules designed for brick-and-mortar operations.If adopted, New Jersey's policy could set a precedent for other states, as economic pressures push legislatures to secure steady revenue streams. A shift to revenue-based thresholds could reduce friction, lower compliance costs, and pave the way for a fairer, more streamlined sales tax landscape in 2025 and beyond.Say Goodbye To Sales Tax Headaches? Sales And Use Tax Simplification This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

BIG NEWS: On Tuesday the South Dakota Senate debated and voted on our Article V application for fiscal restraints, jurisdictional limits, and term limits on the federal government. Listen in to history in the making, then stay tuned as COS President Mark Meckler joins Senior Vice President Rita Peters, as well as Regional Directors Andrew Lusch and Deanna Becket for their live reaction. By a vote of 23-9, the South Dakota Senate approved of the resolution. Will South Dakota be state #20 to join the movement? NOTE: The resolution would still need to make its way through the South Dakota House in order to achieve final passage. SJR 502 is a resolution "applying to the United States Congress for a convention of the states to propose amendments to the United States Constitution regarding the imposition of fiscal restraints on the federal government, further limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office for members of Congress and other federal officials." Introduced by Senator Mehlhaff. COS LIVE Homepage 

In the immediate aftermath of the mammoth fires in Los Angeles, Ralph welcomes Douglas Heller, Director of Insurance at Consumer Federation of America to fill us in on what to expect from the industry and how to get the most out of your fire insurance claims. Then, our resident constitutional scholar, Bruce Fein, returns to present a list of constitutional crises to expect upon the second coming of Donald Trump.Douglas Heller is a nationally-recognized insurance expert and Director of Insurance at Consumer Federation of America. In addition to conducting research for and providing expertise to consumer rights organizations, Mr. Heller is a member of the U.S. Department of Treasury's Federal Advisory Committee on Insurance, an appointee of California's Insurance Commissioner, serving as a board member of the California Automobile Assigned Risk Plan, and he serves on the Executive Board of the Coalition Against Insurance Fraud.A key thing for everybody to know is that the premiums that we have paid over the last several years here in California—and this really goes across the country, but in California in particular—have put the insurance industry in a perfectly healthy position to deal with the claims, as dramatic and as severe as these fires are and the amount of damage that they caused…For the insurance companies to cry poverty in the wake of the buildup of capital over the last several years would be outrageous, and so we're going to be watching for that.Douglas HellerThe story around the country was that California was already a terrible hellscape for the insurance companies to do business in. When in fact, they were doing far better than the rest of the country. One of the big trade journals that reports on the industry has said that State Farm has been kept afloat by its performance in California over the last couple of years. And it was more a kind of a climate opportunism—after ignoring the potential (and then, growing) impact of climate change on property risk for years and decades, the insurance companies finally had this kind of revelation that oh they can talk about climate change as a new risk and a justification for demanding whatever they want.Douglas HellerBattle lines seem to be drawn—at least in my opinion—between the “Drill baby, drill. All we need to do is rake the leaves” camp versus “Hey, this is another wake up call to the climate crisis.” Because this was a severe weather event. And there were four major fires at once, and no fire department, whose main daily job is medical emergencies, is equipped to deal with that. Especially since the first two days the winds were so high—hurricane force winds—they couldn't get helicopters and airplanes into the air to make the drops in these canyons. And I don't think there's any amount of brush clearing that would have stopped these winds from whipping up these embers to send them into these residential districts.Steve SkrovanBruce Fein is a Constitutional scholar and an expert on international law. Mr. Fein was Associate Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan and he is the author of Constitutional Peril: The Life and Death Struggle for Our Constitution and Democracy, and American Empire: Before the Fall.The Trump regime has a high probability of being the most lawless dictatorial regime in American history. All presidents violate laws, but Trump has taken this to a new, boastful level of variety.Ralph NaderThe reason why it's more likely that Trump will use this dragnet in a more abusive ways, is because he and his FBI nominee have said openly that they're going to do everything they can to persecute, to go after their enemies list…The only limitation on abuse is that they don't have the manpower to actually use it all.Bruce FeinWe're the guardrails—not Congress anymore. It's the people who have to stand up and protest and not send scoundrels back to office if they're not discharging their obligations under the United States Constitution. If we aren't the guardrails, there aren't any out there.Bruce FeinNews 1/15/251. In Gaza, CNN reports a ceasefire deal has finally been reached. This comes on the heels of negotiations between the warring parties, attended by envoys of both President Biden and incoming President Trump, with Egyptian and Qatari mediators. Under the terms of this deal, Hamas has agreed to free the remaining 33 Israeli hostages in their custody, while Israel will “free hundreds of Palestinian prisoners.” Trump's apparent demand for an immediate settlement with this many Israeli concessions comes as a shock. Israeli journalist Erel Segal, widely seen as a Netanyahu proxy, is quoted saying “We're the 1st to pay a price for Trump's election. [The deal] is being forced upon us… We thought we'd take control of northern Gaza, that they'd let us impede humanitarian aid.”2. In more foreign policy news, the American Prospect is out with a piece on the gifts received by senior foreign policy officials in the Biden Administration. According to this report, Bill Burns – Director of the Central Intelligence Agency – has in the past year received “an $18,000 astrograph, an $11,000 Omega watch, and a ceremonial Saudi war sword.” By comparison, Secretary of State Antony Blinken received $600 worth of memorabilia and “several acrylic landscape portraits.” As this piece notes, individuals cannot keep these gifts – they become public property – yet the disparity in these gifts does reflect the difference in perception toward Blinken and Burns. As one State Department official put it, “When you want someone to drink champagne, you send Blinken. When you need someone to actually fix s**t in Brazil, the Middle East, or Russia, you send Burns.”3. And in the final days of his administration, AP's Matt Lee reports President Biden will reverse Trump's decision to designate Cuba a state sponsor of terror. The state sponsor of terror designation resulted in Cuba facing even harsher sanctions than they had during the decades-long embargo and led to multiple critical shortages of essential goods like fuel. Since the designation was announced in 2021, many have called for it to be reversed, including New York State Senators and representatives in New York, Massachusetts and Minnesota, as well as local representatives and labor unions like the UAW, UE, and others, per People's Dispatch. It is unclear why Biden is taking this action now and Trump can reverse this move as soon as he takes office.4. Turning to labor, NBC reports the Services Employees International Union (SEIU) will rejoin the AFL-CIO, 20 years after leaving the labor federation. With SEIU back in the fold, the AFL-CIO will represent over 15 million workers. AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler is quoted saying “We are the, probably, only institution in the country that has an infrastructure in every city, in every state, in every workplace, that is a mobilizing machine…And as they say, outside power builds inside power.” This move is widely seen as an attempt to consolidate worker power ahead of Trump's return to office, though the unions have resisted saying so explicitly. The Teamsters left the AFL-CIO around the same time as the SEIU, but have made no moves to rejoin the labor federation and have instead opted to strategically align themselves with Trump. It remains to be seen which strategy will yield better results.5. In more labor news, Fast Company reports servers at Waffle House franchises around the country claim “the chain forces them to do janitorial work and dishwashing for [sub-minimum] tipped wages, robbing them of up to $46.8 million.” As this piece notes, “Wage theft…is a common practice. As of 2017…workers lose $15 billion annually in minimum wage violations alone.” Moreover, “From 2021 to 2024, the Department of Labor recovered more than $1 billion in back wages and damages for 615,000 employees in the U.S.” Waffle House is a particularly egregious offender, with 90% of workers surveyed reporting they had experienced some form of wage theft in the past year. The state minimum wage in Georgia, where Waffle House is based, is a meager $5.15 per hour, yet the tipped minimum is even lower at just $2.13 – a starvation wage. One worker, Melissa Steach, is quoted saying “Corporations can't keep throwing us around because we make all this money for them…And what are they really doing with it? They are not supporting their workers. They can't keep screwing us around. We're here. We're worth it.”6. On the other end of the spectrum, Apple CEO Tim Cook's staggering compensation package hit nearly $75 million in 2024, according to the Hollywood Reporter. Converted to an hourly wage, this equates to roughly $600 per minute. This is a substantial increase from his 2023 total of $63.2 million, but still lower than the nearly $100 million he received in 2022. In October, Apple reported its services business, including Apple Music and iCloud, hit a revenue of $24.97 billion for the quarter, a “new all-time high for the company.”7. In more tech news, the Intercept reports Meta – parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp – is relaxing their content moderation rules as they relate to hate speech. The Intercept received leaked training materials to this effect, which explicitly outline what users are now allowed to say. These officially permitted statements include “Immigrants are grubby, filthy pieces of s**t,” “Jews are flat out greedier than Christians,” and simply “I'm a proud racist.” The Electronic Frontier Foundation's international freedom of expression director Jillian York is quoted in this piece saying, “While [Meta's previous censorship regime] has often resulted in over-moderation that I and many others have criticized, these examples demonstrate that Meta's policy changes are political in nature and not intended to simply allow more freedom of expression.”8. In a more positive story of social progress, EuroNews reports that the Italian Bishops' Conference has issued new guidelines all but clearing the way for openly gay men to enter the priesthood. According to the newly issued report, titled "Guidelines and norms for seminaries,” "When referring to homosexual tendencies, it's… appropriate not to reduce discernment only to this aspect, but, as for every candidate, to grasp its meaning in the global framework of the young person's personality.” In 2023 Pope Francis told the AP that “being homosexual isn't a crime,” and has endorsed the church “blessing” same-sex unions. Women remain entirely excluded from the priesthood.9. On the domestic front, Axios reports Justice Democrats – the progressive insurgent group – is planning a new wave of primary challenges to unseat “corporatist” incumbent Democrats. While the group's number one target seems to be George Latimer, who ousted Congressman Jamaal Bowman from his newly redrawn seat last cycle, spokesperson Usamah Andrabi told Axios the group is, “keeping every deep blue district on the table.” However, many of the prominent House progressives are shying away from this effort. Pramila Jayapal, former chair of the Progressive Caucus said “I think given what's at stake we feel really urgently that we need to protect all incumbents,” while Ilhan Omar said "There are folks who endorse against their own colleagues, but I don't."10. Finally, Public Citizen co-presidents Rob Weissman and Lisa Gilbert have written a letter to the chairs of the Trump Transition team asking to be named members of the Department of Government Efficiency, aka DOGE. In this letter, Weissman and Gilbert express their “concerns about DOGE's structure and mission,” particularly with regard to its proposed leaders Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, who “hold financial interests that will be directly affected by federal budgetary policies,” but also makes the key argument that DOGE's mission to “slash excess regulation” and “cut wasteful expenditures” must be tied to the other “half of the picture: more efficiently regulating corporations to better protect consumers and the public from harmful corporate practices.” They argue that their “appointment to serve as members of DOGE” would enable them to serve as “voices for the interests of consumers and the public who are the beneficiaries of federal regulatory and spending programs.” Rather than an earnest plea for an appointment, this letter is more likely meant to expose a key issue with the DOGE project: those in charge of cutting supposed government waste are riddled with conflicts of interests. They have too many fingers in the pie. If Trump were serious about reducing government spending generally – and corruption specifically – he would appoint people like Weissman and Gilbert, not Ramaswamy and Musk. And they would start with the unbelievably bloated, unauditable Pentagon budget.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

A victorious day for the COS South Dakota team! On January 17, 2025, the South Dakota Senate Committee on State Affairs heard public testimony on SJR 502 (COS Action's Article V Resolution). Rick Santorum gave expert testimony and answered questions from the committee members. Watch COS LIVE Sign the COS Petition SJR 502 is a resolution "applying to the United States Congress for a convention of the states to propose amendments to the United States Constitution regarding the imposition of fiscal restraints on the federal government, further limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office for members of Congress and other federal officials." Introduced by Senator Mehlhaff. 

There have been few changes and additions to the United States Constitution since it was ratified in 1788, despite life being wildly different now a few centuries later. To really put the document into a modern perspective, author AJ Jacobs decided to literally live by the Constitution for a full year and documented the experience in his new book The Year of Living Constitutionally. In today's episode, AJ spoke with Ryan about his inspiration for the book, the contradictions of the Founding Fathers, and the evolution of Presidential power. AJ Jacobs is a New York Times Bestselling author, journalist, lecturer, host of The Puzzler podcast, and self-proclaimed “human guinea pig”. Check out his latest book The Year of Living Constitutionally! Pick up a signed copy of AJ Jacobs' book, The Year of Living Constitutionally at The Painted PorchFollow AJ Jacobs on Instagram @AJJacobsInc and X @AJJacobs. Check out AJ's podcast The Puzzler!

Since the ratification of the United States Constitution in 1788, there have been 60 presidential elections, which have been run every four years.  Over time, a system was developed for the election of the president, including how parties select a candidate and how votes are selected. Some of this has been done via legislation, some via tradition, and some via constitutional amendments.  However, before any of this was established, the very first presidential election was held, which was unlike any other.  Learn more about the Election of 1788 and how the United States figured out how to elect a president on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily. Sponsors Sign up at butcherbox.com/daily and use code daily to get chicken breast, salmon or ground beef FREE in every order for a year plus $20 off your first order! Subscribe to the podcast!  https://link.chtbl.com/EverythingEverywhere?sid=ShowNotes -------------------------------- Executive Producer: Charles Daniel Associate Producers: Ben Long & Cameron Kieffer   Become a supporter on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/everythingeverywhere Update your podcast app at newpodcastapps.com Discord Server: https://discord.gg/UkRUJFh Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/everythingeverywhere/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/everythingeverywheredaily Twitter: https://twitter.com/everywheretrip Website: https://everything-everywhere.com/  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices