Podcasts about us supreme court

For complete Medicare guidance, dial (617) 644-0093 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter Medicare Advisors.After deftly, and infuriatingly, side-stepping the legal question of whether so-called assault weapons bans—typically tight bans on AR-15 style rifles, the most commonly owned class of rifles in America—run afoul of the Second Amendment, the US Supreme Court is taking on that precise issue in the case of Viramontes v. Illinois.The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed its opening brief arguing that the assault weapons bans established by both Illinois and Connecticut—and, by extension, really every assault weapons ban in the country—unconstitutionally infringe the right of the People to keep and bear arms. This appeal to the Supreme Court on this question has been made necessary by the fecklessness of Progressive legislatures who wish to blame gun violence on the inanimate guns rather than the demographic actually behind virtually all American gun violence, and by the equally feckless and intellectually dishonest federal judges who support them.Join me today as I explain the legal arguments in plain English—I even made flow charts, to illustrate the legal reasoning by both the patriot and tyrannical sides of the argument—as well as read through and explain SAF's opening brief. Join me LIVE at 1 PM ET as I break it all down!Make sure you're ready to win the LEGAL FIGHT that follows the PHYSICAL FIGHT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself or your family from criminal predation. Learn why I am PERSONALLY a member of CCW SAFE, and why YOU SHOULD CONSIDER JOINING, TOO:  https://lawofselfdefense.com/ccwsafeClarence Thomas x 9: Perfect SCOTUS Mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2kFor complete Medicare guidance, dial (617) 644-0093 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter.All @TheBrancaShow mugs & MORE! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2kJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9 Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kfFOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nzEpisode #1428.Chapter and its affiliates are not connected with or endorsed by any government entity or the federal Medicare program. Chapter Advisory, LLC represents Medicare Advantage HMO, PPO, and PFFS organizations and stand alone prescription drug plans that have a Medicare contract. Enrollment depends on the plan's contract renewal. While we have a database of every Medicare plan nationwide and can help you to search among all plans, we have contracts with many but not all plans. As a result, we do not offer every plan available in your area. Currently we represent 50 organizations which offer 18,160 products nationwide. We search and recommend all plans, even those we don't directly offer. You can contact a licensed Chapter agent to find out the number of products available in your specific area. Please contact Medicare.gov, 1-800-Medicare, or your local State Health Insurance Program (SHIP) to get information on all of your options.

Democrats are screeching over their inability to cheat with mail-in ballots, and they scream that it's unconstitutional. Federal judges issuing nationwide injunctions against the President is nowhere in the US Constitution. There is no federal law authorizing federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions. The US Supreme Court has said they can't do it. Yet it is still happening. Why? Who is the most admired president? Trump 53%. Reagan 18%. Lincoln 8%. The most pivotal politician in history, perhaps is demonized by the small population of mental midgets. For example, all the Leftist women protecting that baby-killing mother. Speaking of which, if you have sons, pay attention, as I would like you to tell them these two rules for picking their wives: Find one who, (1) won't kill kids, and (2) doesn't have a penis. Oh we have lots of info for you today. Jelly Roll Tiny Houses More on Visas 200,000 visas revoked, mostly from India. This is LONG overdue. And I read a post from some Indian who said, “Wait and see how America works without Indians” WTF do these people think? Do they know our history? Wait…OF COURSE NOT! Because if they did, they would stop f'g with us. America overcomes everything. Kevin Jackson has been called, the "white-collar" Joe Rogan. Given their similar backgrounds in TV, comedy, and martial arts, it's easy to see why people enjoy Kevin's show so much. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com

The US Supreme Court on Monday issued a 6-3 ruling allowing the Trump administration to restrict mail-in voting.

The US Supreme Court just granted President Trump's request for permission to implement his executive order overhauling and restricting mail-in ballot systems. However, additional legal challenges could stand in the way of this plan before the November midterm elections.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com

This week on Hashtag History, we will be discussing the 2000 Presidential Election Recount, also known as Bush v. Gore, since this case did go all the way up to the Supreme Court who was ultimately responsible for making the landmark decision about who would become the president of the United States that fateful year. Why did this election go all the way up to the Supreme Court? Well, that would be because the results of the 2000 presidential election in the State of Florida showed that Republican nominee George W. Bush had beat Democrat nominee Al Gore by a mere 537 votes (537 votes across the whole state!!!), automatically triggering a recount due to how close those results were. Al Gore requested a manual recount due to several irregularities across counties in Florida about which ballots were considered valid and which were not. He only requested this of some counties though, causing the Supreme Court to take the case and decide that the manual recounts should be halted because – by their logic – targeting specific counties disenfranchised voters. Gore was forced to concede Florida to Bush and, with that, Bush – who did not win the popular vote – received the required electoral votes and became the 43rd President of the United States. This was not decided, however, until December 12th of that year. The results of the presidential election were not known until thirty-five days after Election Day!There is so much more than all of that to talk about. Like the fact that – oh, I don't know – the Governor of Florida at the time was Bush's brother. Or the fact that the Supreme Court explicitly said in their final decision that this case was not to be applied to any future cases and should not be used as precedent. Which, like, isn't that the point of the US Supreme Court? To set precedent?Join us to learn all about all of that and so much more!Follow Hashtag History on Instagram @hashtaghistory_podcast for all of the pictures mentioned in this episode.Citations for all sources can be located on our website at www.HashtagHistory-Pod.com. You can also check out our website for super cute merch!You can now sponsor a cocktail and get a shout-out on air! Just head to www.buymeacoffee.com/hashtaghistory or head to the Support tab on our website!You can locate us on www.Patreon.com/hashtaghistory where you can donate $1 a month to our Books and Booze Supply. All of your support goes a long ways and we are endlessly grateful! To show our gratitude, all Patreon Supporters receive an automatic 15% OFF all merchandise in our merchandise store, a shoutout on social media, and stickers!THANKS FOR LISTENING!- Rachel and LeahEditor: Alex PerezCopyright: The Hashtag History Podcast

US Supreme Court sides with White House on mail-in voting. What that means for NC voters

Following his decision to cancel talks with Paramount over the company’s merger with Warner Bros. Discovery, California Attorney General Rob Bonta discusses his decision, and also commented on the US Supreme Court siding with President Donald Trump over his plan to use the Postal Service to impose new restrictions on the distribution of mail ballots. as well as Meta Platforms being sued by a bipartisan coalition of states on allegations of deceiving the public. Bonta spoke with Bloomberg's Joe Mathieu and Kailey Leinz.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

For complete Medicare guidance, dial (617) 644-0093 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter Medicare Advisors.President Trump's new White House ballroom—and the Trump balls that would be held there—are once again threatened by the inane and TDS-driven objections of feckless, unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, federal judges, and the matter has finally, if ridiculously, reached the level of the Supreme Court itself. Famously liberal federal district trial court Judge Richard Leon froze continued construction of the already-started ballroom on the most ridiculous and spurious grounds—because a local DC woman found the uncompleted ballroom would be offensive to her aesthetic sensibilities.The DC Circuit Court of Appeals then affirmed that order freezing construction on a 2-1, with a scathing dissent by Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee from his first term.  (The two judges in the majority were Patricia Millet and Bradley Garcia, appointed by Obama and Biden, respectively.)   They did, however, stay their own order until August 21, to give the White House time to appeal their decision to SCOTUS.The White House did immediately appeal to the US Supreme Court, specifically to Chief Justice John Roberts who handles such appeals in the DC Circuit, and he has ordered a response from the ball-haters by August 18, this coming Tuesday.  This deadline is only days before In today's show we'll take a look at that White House appeal to SCOTUS, setting out the many reasons why the objection to the new White House ballroom is spurious, why the offended plaintiffs lack standing, why any aesthetic objection to the ballroom pales in contrast to the national security and foreign affairs importance of the structure, and much more. Join me LIVE at 12:30 PM ET as I break it all down!Make sure you're ready to win the LEGAL FIGHT that follows the PHYSICAL FIGHT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself or your family from criminal predation. Learn why I am PERSONALLY a member of CCW SAFE, and why YOU SHOULD CONSIDER JOINING, TOO:  https://lawofselfdefense.com/ccwsafeClarence Thomas x 9: Perfect SCOTUS Mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2kAll @TheBrancaShow mugs & MORE! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2kJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9 Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kfFOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nzEpisode #1415.Chapter and its affiliates are not connected with or endorsed by any government entity or the federal Medicare program. Chapter Advisory, LLC represents Medicare Advantage HMO, PPO, and PFFS organizations and stand alone prescription drug plans that have a Medicare contract. Enrollment depends on the plan's contract renewal. While we have a database of every Medicare plan nationwide and can help you to search among all plans, we have contracts with many but not all plans. As a result, we do not offer every plan available in your area. Currently we represent 50 organizations which offer 18,160 products nationwide. We search and recommend all plans, even those we don't directly offer. You can contact a licensed Chapter agent to find out the number of products available in your specific area. Please contact Medicare.gov, 1-800-Medicare, or your local State Health Insurance Program (SHIP) to get information on all of your options.

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected President Donald Trump's last-ditch request to reconsider the $5 million E. Jean Carroll case. The decision leaves intact the 2023 verdict finding Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll and later defaming her. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed with the latest news from a leading Black-owned & controlled media company: https://aurn.com/newsletter Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode of LawPod UK, Lucy McCann is joined by Professor Valena Beety, legal scholar, innocence litigator and former federal prosecutor, to discuss her new book Pink Crime.Professor Beety explores her concept of ‘Pink Crime' a distinctive category of wrongful convictions of women and queer people, often in cases where no crime actually occurred, by examining historic cases and contemporary prosecutions involving pregnancy loss, parenting decisions, and queer identity.The conversation considers the impact of the US Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, including the growing criminalisation of miscarriage and stillbirth, as well as the ways in which similar assumptions about identity and deviance have shaped the treatment of LGBTQ+ people.Lucy and Professor Beety also discuss the dangers of unreliable forensic evidence, the different approaches to equality in the US, Canada and the UK, and the role that lawyers can play in challenging unjust outcomes. Law Pod UK is published by 1 Crown Office Row. Supporting articles are published on the UK Human Rights Blog. Follow and interact with the podcast team on Twitter.

This Day in Legal History: The Social Security ActOn August 14, 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act, creating the foundation of the American social safety net and permanently changing the relationship between citizens and their government. Flanked by members of Congress and photographers, FDR put his signature to a law that guaranteed, for the first time in American history, a measure of economic security against the hazards of old age, unemployment, and poverty.The Act was born of the Great Depression, when the suffering of millions—elderly people with no savings, workers with no jobs, families with no support—overwhelmed the old assumption that hardship was a purely private matter. Social Security established old-age benefits funded by taxes on workers and employers, created a federal-state system of unemployment insurance, and provided aid for dependent children, the blind, and people with disabilities. Roosevelt himself was clear-eyed about its limits, saying at the signing that no law could insure everyone against every vicissitude of life, but that this one gave “some measure of protection” against poverty-ridden old age and unemployment.The legal significance runs deep, and it connects to a story we've told before on this show. When the Social Security Act was challenged as an unconstitutional federal overreach and an improper use of the taxing power, it reached a Supreme Court that had been striking down New Deal programs left and right. But in 1937—in the same term as the failed court-packing fight and the Court's famous doctrinal shift—the justices upheld Social Security, in Steward Machine Company v. Davis and Helvering v. Davis, broadly reading Congress's power to tax and spend for the general welfare. Those decisions helped cement the constitutional foundation of the modern administrative and welfare state. Ninety-one years later, Social Security remains the single largest program in the federal budget, and the principle it established—that the national government has a role in securing the economic dignity of its people—remains, as our opening quote from FDR suggests, a live measure of the country's progress.A federal trade court has upheld President Trump's authority to close the “de minimis” tariff exemption—handing the administration a rare courtroom win on tariffs. The U.S. Court of International Trade, a three-judge panel in New York, ruled that Trump lawfully used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to end the duty-free treatment that low-value imports—parcels worth $800 or less—had long enjoyed. Some quick background: the de minimis exemption is what let a flood of cheap packages, especially from Chinese e-commerce sellers, enter the U.S. tariff-free, and closing it has already generated over a billion dollars in new duty payments. What makes this ruling notable is that it cuts against the trend. Trump's tariff agenda has fared badly in court—the Supreme Court ruled in February that IEEPA does not authorize him to unilaterally impose sweeping tariffs, which led to that roughly $100 billion in refunds we covered, and the trade court later struck down a replacement tariff. So how does the administration win this one? The court drew a fine but important distinction: ending a duty-free privilege is not the same as affirmatively imposing a tariff. The challenger, an auto-parts importer, argued IEEPA gave the president no independent power to close the exemption, but the panel found that rescinding a trade-related “privilege” falls within the emergency-powers statute even if imposing new tariffs does not. The significance is that it carves out a narrow lane where the administration's emergency-powers theory actually holds up—a reminder that in the tariff wars, the difference between taking away a benefit and imposing a new burden can be the difference between winning and losing in court. US court backs Trump's power to close ‘de minimis' tariff exemption | ReutersCNBC · BloombergThe Supreme Court has taken up a case that sounds technical but goes to the heart of whether wrongly detained immigrants can find a lawyer at all. The question is whether attorneys who successfully challenge an immigrant's detention through a habeas corpus petition can recover their fees from the federal government. It turns on the Equal Access to Justice Act—a statute that lets people who beat the government in court recover their attorney's fees, unless the government's position was “substantially justified.” Here's why this matters enormously right now. As immigration detention has surged, so have habeas petitions challenging it: one court in California went from a handful of these cases in 2021 to hundreds in a single month this year, and courts have repeatedly ordered the government to pay fees after finding people were detained unlawfully. But two federal appeals courts, the Fourth and Fifth Circuits, have held that habeas challenges to immigration detention aren't the kind of “civil case” the fee statute covers—which would mean the lawyers who win these cases can't recover a dime. Think about the practical stakes. Detained immigrants are frequently poor, often can't work, and have no right to a free lawyer in immigration proceedings. Fee-shifting is a big part of what makes it economically possible for attorneys to take these cases at all. If the Supreme Court rules that EAJA doesn't apply, it doesn't change the substance of anyone's detention—but it quietly removes much of the financial incentive for lawyers to challenge unlawful detention, weakening one of the few real checks on the system. The significance is that this is access to justice in its most concrete form: whether the courthouse door stays open depends, as it so often does, on who can afford to walk through it. US Supreme Court case tests fees for immigration detainees | ReutersSCOTUSblog · Bloomberg LawAnd finally, a story from the frontier of AI misuse that is equal parts alarming and absurd. A Connecticut judge has sanctioned a plaintiff who hid secret instructions inside his own court filings—instructions aimed not at the judge, but at any artificial intelligence that might read the documents. The plaintiff, representing himself, buried text in white font on a white background, invisible to a human eye, telling any AI model reviewing the filing to side with him. This is what's known as a “prompt injection” attack, and it's reportedly the first documented instance of one aimed at a U.S. court. The court caught it—apparently tipped off by strange white spaces in the text—and issued an order warning him to stop. He didn't. At the next hearing, he'd hidden a message reading “hi, I hope you can't see me,” and, in another filing, a concealed link to a SpongeBob SquarePants video. The judge was not amused, issuing a decision bluntly titled “Court Sanction for Plaintiff's Use of Prompt-Injection.” The remedy is almost poetically low-tech: the plaintiff is now barred from filing electronically and must submit everything on paper. Now, it's easy to laugh—and the SpongeBob link earns a chuckle—but the serious point is real. This is a new species of the AI-integrity problem we've tracked all summer, alongside the fake hallucinated citations. It's an attempt to corrupt the decision-making process itself, and it quietly reveals something bigger: that courts and their staff may increasingly be using AI tools to help review filings, which creates a brand-new attack surface for litigants willing to game it. The significance is that the age-old duty of candor to the tribunal now has to contend with adversaries trying to whisper to the machines—and courts are going to need new rules, and sharp eyes, to catch them. Connecticut judge says plaintiff hid messages for AI in court filings | Reuters404 Media · Tom's Hardware 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

Host Paul Pacelli opened a new week on "Connecticut Today" looking at some surprising statements from former Vice-President Kamala Harris, who's rumored to be considering another White House run for 2028 (00:35). Retired FBI agent Ken Gray joined us from the University of New Haven to chat about the growing controversy surrounding automated license plate readers (14:34), while blogger and columnist Terry Cowgill dropped by from the CT NewsJunkie (22:40)

Today's top stories, with context, in just 15 minutes. On today's podcast: 1) President Trump said the US was only "semi-negotiating" with Tehran on the Strait of Hormuz, and that the US was "low keying it" as Iran faces huge inflation and no money. Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei's military adviser Mohsen Rezaee was named the new leader of the Supreme National Security Council, replacing Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, and has been an advocate for full Iranian control over Hormuz. Tehran published a list of demands for Washington as conditions for fully reopening Hormuz, including lifting the naval blockade, withdrawing forces, removing sanctions, and releasing frozen assets, which may be difficult for the US to meet alone.2) Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected a proposal by US-backed mediators for disarming Hamas, saying "Israel does not accept the 15-point document." Netanyahu stated that the Israel Defense Forces will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is genuinely disarmed and it will continue to thwart threats against Israeli forces and citizens. The Board of Peace described the roadmap as its deal with Hamas, rather than with Israel, and said that nobody is required to do anything before verified steps are taken on the ground by the Palestinian cadres.3) The US Supreme Court has a reputation problem, with polls showing poor approval ratings and a record low support amid continued attacks on the institution from President Trump. A majority of Americans believe the justices tend to act for political reasons, not legal ones, which experts see as unhealthy and potentially dangerous. The court's reputation has been driven down by factors including a hyper-partisan confirmation process, polarizing decisions, and ethics controversies, leading to calls for Congress to impose term limits or expand the court.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So many businesses both big and small have felt the impact of tariffs but one of our frequent guests over the past year, Beth Benike of Busy Baby is finally a success story amid these tariffs as she recently received her refund from the US Supreme Court and she updates us on her journey and current state of her business!

Former state solicitors general Michael Mongan and Kevin Gallagher discuss the evolving role of state solicitors general and how states work together to shape legal battles before the Supreme Court. --- When states go to court, the battles are not always divided along party lines. State solicitors general often work across state lines to defend shared interests, coordinate legal strategy, and help shape cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. In this episode, former California Solicitor General Michael Mongan, JD '06 (BA '01), and former Virginia Solicitor General Kevin Gallagher, now partners at WilmerHale, join podcast host Professor Pam Karlan to discuss how the role of state solicitors general has evolved. They discuss multistate litigation, bipartisan coalitions, and how states can work together when their legal interests align. Mongan explains that bipartisan cooperation often happens when “they share sovereign interests as states and those interests are genuinely threatened.” Michael Mongan  >>> WilmerHale Page Kevin Gallagher  >>>  WilmerHale Page Connect: Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast Website Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn Page Rich Ford >>> Twitter/X Pam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School Page Stanford Law School >>> Twitter/X Stanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X Chapters 00:00 Introduction 03:03 What does a State Solicitor General actually do?  04:24 Independence from the Governor  06:10 Who speaks for the state?  09:22 How Virginia united every state  12:44 Where red and blue states actually agree  15:12 The mechanics of building a multistate coalition  17:06 Avoiding duplicate briefs: who writes first?  19:53 From public service to a state AG private practice  20:55 Why firms are racing to build state AG expertise  24:57 Favorite cases 28:44 Closing  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode, Becky sits down with Dr. John Kirk Boyd, a civil and environmental rights lawyer and the visionary behind the International Bill of Rights: Humanity's Agreement to Live Together. This conversation goes far beyond a standard book review. Dr. Boyd discusses his lifelong mission to move human rights from mere aspirations to enforceable realities through an international judicial architecture. He shares fascinating insights into his legal background—including arguing before the US Supreme Court—and his work on the Russian Constitution. In this episode, we explore: The Mission of Unite for Rights: How the project seeks to extend the historic work of Eleanor Roosevelt and René Cassin to create a modern social contract. Interactive Technology: A look at the "spinning globe" and the "Drafting Through Dialogue" initiative, where global citizens can participate in refining the Bill of Rights. AI as a Collaborator: How Dr. Boyd and his team are utilizing AI (specifically Claude) as a tool for refinement and human-centric collaboration rather than just data scraping. The Power of the "Triad": Why authors should embrace the combination of print, e-book, and audiobook to reach a global audience. A Call to Action: How listeners can participate in this global movement, from signing their names on the digital globe to supporting the growth of the Unite for Rights organization. Whether you are an author interested in the production process or a global citizen concerned about the future of democracy and human rights, this episode offers a profound look at how storytelling and law can converge to shape a better world. Support our work making the audiobook industry a more equitable place HERE: buymeacoffee.com/audiobookconnection   

Dr. Danny Huerta hosts a special episode with Focus on the Family Policy Analyst, Jeff Johnston to brief parents on recent US Supreme Court developments affecting education. From "opting out" of assignments, to gender specific sports teams, we'll give you what you need to know for the start of the school year. We even discuss how to approach teachers, school administrations, and even school boards when a line has been crossed. Make sure you share this episode with all of the parents you're meeting at your child's school, and download the Equipping Parents for Back to School 2026 resource, too!7 Traits of Effective ParentingCheck Out The Daily CitizenGet Your Free Download of Equipping Parents For Back To School 2026Bring Your Bible To School Day InformationAsk Us Your Question via Voicemail or EmailHelping Children Through An Identity CrisisSpeak To A CounselorShop our podcast store

The parental rights issue in this case lies at the very heart of American liberty. Constitutional expert, lawyer, author, pastor, and founder of Liberty Counsel Mat Staver discusses the important topics of the day with co-hosts and guests that impact life, liberty, and family. To stay informed and get involved, visit LC.org.

Guest Congressman Ron Estes, 4th District Kansas, joins to discuss wrapping up session before recess. Discussion of appropriation bills, continuing resolution bill, SAVE America Act, and more. Will we see the government shutdown in October, and can we get the SAVE Act passed in the Senate through the Reconciliation process? It's Primary election day. Will Michigan vote in a radical Democrat candidate for Senate? Kansas looks to change Supreme Court nomination process. And Pete Buttigieg wants to reform the US Supreme Court process. 

This Day in Legal History: The Immigration Act of 1882On August 3, 1882, President Chester A. Arthur signed the Immigration Act of 1882, the first comprehensive federal law regulating immigration into the United States. Before this, immigration had largely been left to the individual states; this Act marked the moment the federal government claimed the subject as its own, and it built the first federal machinery for controlling who could enter the country.The Act did two enduring things. First, it imposed a “head tax”—fifty cents on every immigrant arriving by ship—to fund the administration of immigration, and it placed enforcement under the Secretary of the Treasury, creating the country's first federal immigration bureaucracy. Second, and more consequentially for the law that followed, it created categories of people who would be excluded: convicts, the “insane,” and—in language that would echo for the next century and a half—”any person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge.” That public-charge concept, born here in 1882, is the same doctrine we discussed just a couple of weeks ago when the current administration revived an expansive version of the public-charge rule.The significance of August 3, 1882 is that it is the taproot of the entire federal immigration system. Coming just months after the Chinese Exclusion Act, it established the foundational premise that the national government decides the terms of admission to the United States, and it introduced the framework—head taxes, excludable categories, federal enforcement—on which everything since has been built. It's worth sitting with the tension in the date: 1882 is also, almost exactly, the moment Emma Lazarus was composing “The New Colossus,” with its welcome to the tired and the poor. The law and the poem were born together, and the distance between them—between the statute's exclusions and the sonnet's embrace—is a distance the country has been arguing about ever since.Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has formally rescinded the $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund,” clearing what had been the biggest obstacle to his confirmation. If you were with us last week, this is the resolution of that story. The fund—created by a Justice Department order back in May—would have used taxpayer money to compensate people who claimed to be victims of the prior administration's Justice Department, a group that notably included those convicted in connection with the January 6 Capitol attack. Republican Senator John Cornyn had refused to support Blanche's nomination until the fund was killed, and this week Blanche did exactly that, signing an order declaring the May directive “rescinded” with “no force or effect,” and, as part of the deal, agreeing to limit the related immunity arrangement so it applies only to the IRS and not to other agencies. The significance ties together several threads we've followed all summer. This fund grew out of the same collusive IRS settlement that a federal judge voided as a sham, and it sat at the center of concerns about the Justice Department being used to reward the president's allies. That a senator from the president's own party forced its formal repeal as the price of confirmation is advice-and-consent working as a genuine check—and it means the incoming attorney general takes office having had to publicly dismantle one of the administration's most criticized initiatives before the Senate would trust him with the job.Acting US Attorney General Blanche rescinds ‘anti-weaponization' fund before confirmation vote | ReutersNPR · NBC NewsIn a court filing, Capital One has disclosed for the first time that it closed more than 300 Trump Organization bank accounts back in 2021 after an anti-money-laundering review—the first time a bank has formally tied such concerns to its decision to cut off the president's family business. The context is a lawsuit: the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust and Eric Trump sued Capital One in Florida last year, alleging the bank “debanked” them for political reasons, having notified the Trump Organization of the closures in March 2021, just weeks after January 6. Capital One's filing reframes that story entirely. The bank says its compliance team did precisely what federal regulators expect—flagging accounts that raised anti-money-laundering red flags and acting on them. Here's the legal machinery underneath. Under the Bank Secrecy Act and related anti-money-laundering rules, banks are legally obligated to monitor their customers, file suspicious-activity reports, and, when warranted, close accounts; failing to do so can expose a bank to serious regulatory penalties. Importantly, Capital One did not accuse the Trump Organization of actual money laundering—flagging a risk and proving a crime are very different things. The significance is that this is a clean collision between two hot legal debates: the “debanking” complaint that financial institutions are dropping customers for political or ideological reasons, and the reality that banks operate under mandatory AML obligations that require them to shed risky accounts. A court will now have to decide which of those framings fits what Capital One actually did.Capital One says it closed Trump Organization's accounts after anti-money-laundering review | ReutersCNBC · NPRTom Goldstein, the prominent Supreme Court advocate and SCOTUSblog founder we've been following, has launched his appeal—asking the Fourth Circuit to overturn his twelve convictions for tax and mortgage fraud and to undo his six-year prison sentence. Recall the case: a jury found that Goldstein concealed millions from a secret high-stakes poker life, diverted his law firm's fees to cover gambling debts, and lied to mortgage lenders; he was sentenced to 72 months and ordered to pay more than $3 million in restitution. The appeal is a reminder that even a resource-intensive, headline conviction gets a second look, and Goldstein is raising some genuinely lawyerly arguments. The most interesting is venue—the constitutional requirement that a defendant be tried in the right place. His team argues that while prosecutors proved he filled out loan applications in Maryland, they never proved from where he actually transmitted the documents, leaning on a recent Fourth Circuit decision that took venue seriously. He's also challenging the admission of statements he made in media interviews and the wording of the jury instructions. Commentators describe his path as daunting, and it is—appellate courts rarely overturn convictions, and factual findings get real deference. But the significance is that these are exactly the kinds of technical, procedural issues on which serious appeals are built. Goldstein spent his career winning cases at the top of the appellate system; now he's testing whether that same system will scrutinize the government's work in convicting him.US Supreme Court lawyer Tom Goldstein appeals tax conviction | ReutersLaw360 · Bloomberg LawAnd finally, the Justice Department has moved to drop its criminal case against David Hearn, the former Olympic canoeist charged with vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool—and the reason is striking. We covered Hearn's not-guilty plea back in July, when his lawyers called the prosecution an abuse of power built on a “concocted narrative.” It turns out that characterization may have been closer to the truth than the charge. In a 20-page filing, prosecutors acknowledged that evidence received after Hearn was indicted shows the damage to the pool “was the result of flawed installation by the contractor,” compounded by “the rush to complete the project” before the America 250 celebrations around July 4. In other words: not vandalism—shoddy construction. The U.S. Attorney's office said it only learned of the flawed-installation evidence after a grand jury had already indicted him. The significance goes right to prosecutorial power and its risks. A 67-year-old man was detained for hours and charged with a felony over damage that, by the government's own admission, he didn't cause. The case collapsing is the system correcting itself—but only after Hearn spent weeks as a felony defendant. It's a real-world illustration of a point we keep returning to: the decision to charge is one of the most consequential and least reviewable powers in the legal system, and when it's exercised on a flawed factual premise, the damage to the person charged is done long before the dismissal.US Justice Department drops case against former US Olympian over Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool | ReutersPBS NewsHour · CNN 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 April this year, the US Supreme Court struck down Louisiana's voting map on the grounds that state lawmakers had violated the constitution by creating a second district with a majority of Black voters.  This was followed by a similar decision by the court in June, giving Alabama the green light to eliminate a Black majority district. At the same time, President Trump has called for more restrictive voting laws and cast doubt on the legitimacy of the upcoming midterms. To discuss what the decision in Louisiana v. Callais means for future US elections and the long erosion of voting rights protections, from the limitations of the 15th amendment to the evisceration of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, Adam Shatz is joined by Mara Gay, a staff writer at the New York Times, and Randall Kennedy, a professor of law at Harvard. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The parental rights issue in this case lies at the very heart of American liberty. Constitutional expert, lawyer, author, pastor, and founder of Liberty Counsel Mat Staver discusses the important topics of the day with co-hosts and guests that impact life, liberty, and family. To stay informed and get involved, visit LC.org.

Read more from VPM News:  Spanberger has restored voting rights to more than 66,000 Virginians  Virginia 'assault weapons' ban on hold until US Supreme Court hears gun cases    Other links:  Backers of Family Justice Center to seek $2 million from city for startup costs next year (The Richmonder)  Virginia's disability services gap persists despite progress, leaves young adults vulnerable (Virginia Mercury)  Harrisonburg City Council votes to end contract with Flock Safety (29News)  Report reveals cause of fireworks malfunction at Flying Squirrels game (WTVR)  Ticks are taking over in Virginia. Could ODU's 'tick robot' help? (WHRO)  *This outlet uses a paywall.  Our award-winning work is made possible with your donations. Visit vpm.org/donate to support local journalism.

If you run a business that exports to the United States, how big is the tariff you have to pay? In 2025 that question was hard to answer. Between February and December, 53 separate announcements introduced, delayed, reinstated or changed US tariffs, with different countries and products pulled in or exempted each time.Kalina Manova (UCL, CEPR) and her colleagues built a database of every one of those announcements, but they also measured  the confusion that those announcements created. She tells Tim Phillips about how tariff confusion has become a second tax on trade, as confusion puts off exporters: but it's one that raises no revenue. On average, uncertainty about the actual tariff doubled the damage done to trade by the tariff hikes themselves. For some countries it tripled it. Does this result mean that, if the US cleared up the confusion by not changing its tariffs regularly, it could double tariff income for the same impact on trade?The research behind this episode:Manova, Kalina, Dennis Novy, Thomas Sampson, and Aaron Tang. 2026. "Tariff Confusion." CEPR Discussion Paper DP21688 (gated).To cite this episode:Phillips, Tim, and Kalina Manova. 2026. "Tariff Confusion." VoxTalks Economics (podcast).About the guestKalina Manova is Professor of Economics at University College London and a Research Fellow at the Centre for Economic Policy Research. Her work spans global production networks and multinational activity, firm productivity and management, trade policy, and the financial frictions that shape international trade and investment. She holds an AB, AM and PhD from Harvard, and has previously held posts at Stanford, Princeton and Oxford.Research cited in this episodeUS Tariff Announcement Database (USTAD). The dataset Manova and her co-authors assembled by hand from US presidential executive orders and proclamations, recording all 53 tariff announcements of 2025 and tracing, for roughly 230 origin countries and more than 18,000 ten-digit product categories, the statutory tariff in place each month.The four confusion measures. With no direct way to measure confusion, the paper proxies it four ways: the cumulative number of relevant announcements a firm had to track; the number of possible tariff calculations those announcements could produce (labelled tariff mess, defined as two to the power of the number of announcements); the highest tariff a firm might infer if it heard only the bad news (tariff max); and how far that worst case sits above the true statutory rate (tariff miss).The firm survey. A survey of roughly 4,500 firms in the US and Canada in March and April 2025 found that around 45% believed tariffs on Chinese goods were below 20%, when the true average was about 42%; at the same time, 87% underestimated how many announcements had postponed or rolled back tariffs. Firms were wrong in both directions at once.Trade policy uncertainty. A prior literature on uncertainty about future tariffs, which tends to find that firms delay forming trade relationships when the future is unclear. The paper's contribution is to separate confusion about current tariffs from uncertainty about future ones, and to show the former bites on its own.Relationship-specific investment and trust. Trade in goods that require buyers and suppliers to customise to one another, or that sit in stickier supply relationships, proved more resilient to confusion; so did trade with countries whose populations report higher trust in foreigners. Informal trust, rather than formal contract enforcement, did the work of cushioning the shock.The IEEPA ruling. In February 2026 the US Supreme Court ruled that the tariffs imposed in 2025 under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act were unlawful. The paper's data stops before the ruling, which generated fresh policy change and, presumably, fresh confusion.More VoxTalks Economics episodesWorld War Trade. Richard Baldwin on how the April 2025 tariffs settled into a trade Cold War, and why the rest of the world kept trading without the US.Europe in the Middle. Pol Antrà s and Beata Javorcik on where redirected Chinese exports go when they can no longer sell in the US, and what that means for European firms and consumers.How exchange rates responded to tariffs. Giancarlo Corsetti on why the dollar fell after Liberation Day when tariffs should, in theory, have pushed it the other way.Related reading on VoxEU.orgTrump and Tariffs, a VoxEU debate page collecting research on how the 2025 tariffs are reshaping supply chains, trade relationships and market stability.

Can you think of a time in history when a law has been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court?Having been used over 180 times, judicial review is one of the most important powers that the US Supreme Court has. So where did it come from?In this episode, Don and is joined by Professor Cliff Sloan to discuss the 1803 ruling of Marbury v. Madison. Cliff has served on all three branches of the Federal Government during his career. He now teaches at Georgetown Law, serves on the board of the Journal of Supreme Court History and is the author of 'The Court at War: FDR, His Justices and the World They Made'.Edited by Aidan Lonergan. Produced by Sophie Gee. Senior Producer was Freddy Chick.Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week and ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe.  All music from Epidemic Sounds.American History Hit is a History Hit podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

​84-year-old Michael Madigan's sentence last year for bribery conspiracy, wire fraud and other crimes means the former Illinois House Speaker could be in prison until he's nearly 90-years-old. ​This year, a federal appeals court in Chicago upheld Madigan's February 2025 conviction, saying Madigan "sustained and concealed arrangement to exchange enormous political influence within the Illinois General Assembly for over $3 million of benefit for political allies.” The Supreme Court only takes a fraction of the cases presented to it, making Madigan's petition to the nation's highest court a long shot.

7/30/26 Host Buz Eisenberg Dr Caitlyn Pierce & Donald Snyder political scientists at the University of Massachusetts Amherst: measuring judicial appeasement in the U.S. Supreme Court Carol Rose Executive Director of the ACLU of Massachusetts: Police & Government Surveillance and challenging the military as immigration judges Nate Clifford & Jade Jump Co-owners of Cornucopia Market on their move to Dwight St in Holyoke & their recent grand opening All That Jazz w/ John Anz & Musician Jason Scwartz on his musical journey and monthly performance series at Theodore's in Springfield

President Trump's Executive Order 14,399, “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections” is designed to stop the rampant fraud made efficient by states using universal mail-in ballots—particularly by the mailing (and return) of ballots to persons not legally eligible to vote, such as aliens legal and illegal, persons no longer living in a state, and even dead people. Naturally, the Progressive Fascist Democrats whose political power is based entirely on just these kinds of voting fraud see Trump's efforts as an existential political threat, and so are leveraging their only tool of political power—the unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior, federal district trial court judges—to try to maintain their ability to steal elections by stopping Trump's efforts to stop mail-in ballot fraud. Sure enough, a federal judge came through for the Democrats and issued a remarkable injunction against Trump's executive order, in an effort to delay it's effect past this November's mid-term elections.Now the great and powerful White House Solicitor General John Sauer has appealed the injunction to the US Supreme Court, and I'll be breaking down that argument for all of us in today's show. Join me LIVE at 10 AM ET as I break it all down!Clarence Thomas x 9: Perfect SCOTUS Mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2kFor complete Medicare guidance, dial (617) 644-0093 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter.All @TheBrancaShow mugs & MORE! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2kJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9 Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kfFOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nzEpisode #1396.Chapter and its affiliates are not connected with or endorsed by any government entity or the federal Medicare program. Chapter Advisory, LLC represents Medicare Advantage HMO, PPO, and PFFS organizations and stand alone prescription drug plans that have a Medicare contract. Enrollment depends on the plan's contract renewal. While we have a database of every Medicare plan nationwide and can help you to search among all plans, we have contracts with many but not all plans. As a result, we do not offer every plan available in your area. Currently we represent 50 organizations which offer 18,160 products nationwide. We search and recommend all plans, even those we don't directly offer. You can contact a licensed Chapter agent to find out the number of products available in your specific area. Please contact Medicare.gov, 1-800-Medicare, or your local State Health Insurance Program (SHIP) to get information on all of your options.

Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com

There's been a lot of discussion of Roe vs Wade this year, with the US Supreme Court controversially overturning the decision nearly half a century after it was made. Henceforth, each American state is free to decide whether abortion is legal or not, to the despair of many women's rights supporters. But if we go back to 1960s America, abortion was illegal pretty much everywhere and treated as equivalent to homicide, from a legal perspective at least. In many places, birth control was prohibited for unmarried women. Things were gradually changing, with some states reforming their antiabortion laws. But a group of women known as the Jane Collective weren't waiting around for that to happen. They took matters into their own hands, literally! Who were these women and how did the group start out? Were they the only ones performing illegal abortions? Didn't the authorities clamp down on their activities?  ⁠In under 3 minutes, we answer your questions !⁠ To listen to the latest episodes, click here: ⁠What is tagskryt, the Scandinavian sustainable travel trend?⁠ ⁠Is it time the UK acknowledged its role in the slave trade?⁠ ⁠Why do we sneeze?⁠ A podcast written and realised by Joseph Chance First Broadcast: 19/9/2022 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Kate Adie introduces stories on India's 'cockroach' protests, anger in Ukraine over army recruitment, the Iranian school bombed at the start of the war, fears over voting changes in America's deep south, and the bio-hacking phenomenon in Berlin.The Cockroach Janta Party, or CJP, is now one of India's most visible youth movements, driving tens of thousands of students to take to the streets to protest about education, corruption, and a lack of job opportunities. Azadeh Moshiri met demonstrators in central Delhi.President Zelensky's decision to replace Ukraine's popular defence minister Mykhailo Federov triggered an outburst of anger this week. The country's military is struggling on several fronts - not least when it comes to signing-up new soldiers. Sarah Rainsford reports on the growing hostility around conscription. In Iran we return to the opening hours of the conflict back in February, when a strike on an Iranian school transformed an ordinary Saturday morning into one of the war's defining tragedies - and its deadliest single incident for civilians. Nawal Al-Maghafi returned to the scene in Minab. In Alabama, there is concern that a recent decision by the US Supreme Court could roll back hard-earned civil rights victories which protected the interests of minority African-American voters. Brandon Drenon has been speaking to voters in Tuskegee. And so-called bio-hacking – using data to optimise one's health, mental performance, and longevity - is being embraced by start-ups across Europe. Simon Busch has been finding out more in Berlin - one of the industry's thriving hubs.Series Producer: Serena Tarling Production coordinators: Gemma Ashman & Sophie Hill Editor: Richard Fenton-Smith

A brand new tariff rollout happens at the White House after the US Supreme Court kicked their old plan to the curb. Plus, the Iran war widens.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Every day, judges make decisions that change lives forever. They do so while reckoning with some of the worst of human nature, overwhelming workloads and constant public scrutiny - pressures that can ultimately affect the quality of justice they deliver.The Honorable Rangajeeva Wimalasena, Judge of the National and Supreme Courts of Papua New Guinea, told UN News that judicial well-being is not simply about providing support for the profession, it's also about safeguarding the integrity of courts and ensuring fair, impartial justice for all.He spoke to Jolina Dong – who last year saw the law in action up close after interning at the US Supreme Court – just ahead of the International Day of Judicial Well-being on 25 July.

Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com

In breaking news, E Jean Carroll, Trump's sex abuse survivor, should be getting the $5.8 million dollars he owes her today, as his Emergency application to the Second Circuit last night to block the payment was DENIED. Popok explains that Trump can try to lob in a hand grenade/Hail Mary to the US Supreme Court, but they just ruled against him in the case 9-0, less than 2 weeks ago, and he's going to have to go through Justice Sotomayor first! Check out the Popok Firm: https://thepopokfirm.com Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Glyphosate is in the news again. The US Supreme Court has sided with Trump in protecting Monsanto (and Bayer) from legal immunity over Roundup-caused cancer. But what does it all mean? Let's find out with Dr. Michael Antonious, a world-renowned expert in glyphosate toxicology.

Who's to blame for the Plessy v. Ferguson Ruling?This week, The Alarmist (Rebecca Delgado Smith) discusses the devastating decision in the US Supreme Court's Plessy v. Ferguson case which solidified the infamous American era of Jim Crow laws and the doctrine of “Separate but equal.” Was this due to the failure of Reconstruction? Did the political climate of the late 19th century have too much sway over the US Supreme court at the time? Or perhaps it's simply we the people who are ultimately to blame. Fact Checker Faryn Einhorn and Producer Clayton Early join the conversation. Join our Patreon!Tell us who you think is to blame at http://thealarmistpodcast.comEmail us at thealarmistpodcast@gmail.comFollow us on Instagram @thealarmistpodcastFollow us on TikTok @thealarmistpodcast Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/alarmist. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A landmark Supreme Court decision shakes up digital privacy, setting new limits on police surveillance and potentially redefining personal data rights in the age of AI and location tracking. Plus, Chinese AI models are rapidly gaining ground while American companies battle lawsuits, regulatory crackdowns, and soaring chip shortages. The global race for AI dominance is wide open! US Supreme Court rules geofence warrants require constitutional protections Musk's X poses "serious risk to Americans' privacy," advocates warn FTC The World Cup added $1 billion in security systems. What happens after the games end? U.S. Lifts Restrictions on Anthropic's Most Powerful A.I. Models OpenAI floats giving Trump administration 5 percent cut of AI boom Cloudflare to block cynical search-and-scrape bots from ad-supported web pages Companies Are Throttling Employees' AI Use Because It's Too Expensive Chinese A.I. Models Gain Ground on Anthropic and OpenAI Swedish court orders Google to pay $1.5 billion to Klarna in antitrust damages Google loses final appeal over $4.7 billion EU Android antitrust fine Google warns EU's plans to weaken its monopoly could expose user data Google's AI buildout drove 37% increase in electricity use in 2025 America Is Having MacBook Sticker Shock Apple may struggle to get clearance for Chinese RAM, even for Chinese iPhones BYD Sells the Most Battery Electric Cars Again NASA mission to rescue the falling Swift observatory has launched NASA inspector general suggests Boeing's Starliner will now be a decade late South Korea to spend $1T on more memory chip production and humanoid robots Spotify deletes streams of chart-topping song after suspicious Kalshi bets Prediction Markets Let You Bet on Whether a Wildfire Will Burn Down Your Town Host: Leo Laporte Guests: Jason Hiner, Lisa Schmeiser, and Owen JJ Stone Download or subscribe to This Week in Tech at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-tech Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: blackhat.com/us-26 and use code TWIT canary.tools/twit - use code: TWIT zscaler.com/security box.com/AI helixsleep.com/twit expressvpn.com/twit

In stunning news, E Jean Carroll's lawyers have accused Trump of defaming and attacking his sex abuse survivor AGAIN in retaliation for his having LOST at the US Supreme Court to overturn her judgment, as he tries to avoid paying her the first of 2 jury verdicts in her favor, this one now standing at $5.5 million. Popok reports that Trump goes so far in his attack as to claim that the “United States of America” is who the case is really about (?!?), not his sex attack! Plaud: Get up to 20% OFF with code: LEGALAF at https://Plaud.ai/legalaf Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In stunning news, E Jean Carroll's lawyers have accused Trump of defaming and attacking his sex abuse survivor AGAIN in retaliation for his having LOST at the US Supreme Court to overturn her judgment, as he tries to avoid paying her the first of 2 jury verdicts in her favor, this one now standing at $5.5 million. Popok reports that Trump goes so far in his attack as to claim that the “United States of America” is who the case is really about (?!?), not his sex attack! Plaud: Get up to 20% OFF with code: LEGALAF at https://Plaud.ai/legalaf Subscribe:  @LegalAFMTN  Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A bevy of rulings from the US Supreme Court this Week. John talks with attorney Ian Speir about them. America celebrates his 250th birthday and John and Maria answer questions from listeners.    Segment 1 – SCOTUS Decisions  MSN article on Supreme Court rulings  Segment 2 – Independence Day  Breakpoint article on patriotism  PBS The American Revolution  Breakpoint article on Europeans visiting America  Segment 3 – Questions and Comments  NPR article on disability memo  Joni and Friends website  Legacy Coalition  Big Picture Story Bible  The Jesus Storybook Bible  Summit Ministries  Worldview Academy  Impact 360 Institute       

The Supreme Court's ruling that babies born in the US have a constitutional right to citizenship is a major setback for President Trump's immigration agenda, and has been welcomed by civil rights groups. Donald Trump said the court's decision was "too bad" and vowed to continue to fight to end birthright citizenship through legislation. Also: Spain is taking a very different approach to immigration as more than one million undocumented migrants and asylum seekers apply for legal status under a government scheme. A week on from the earthquakes in Venezuela, a three year old boy has pulled alive from the rubble. Tanzanian authorities say they are doing everything they can to prevent the Ebola virus arriving there from neighbouring countries. We hear the stories of some women in Ukraine who are turning to beauty and fashion as a way of dealing with the trauma of war. Despite huge excitement about her return to the Wimbledon Tennis Championships, Serena Williams is knocked out in the first round by the 20-year-old Australian player Maya Joint. And one of the greatest basketball players of all time, LeBron James, is on the move to find a new team. The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.ukPhoto: Demonstrators hold letters making up the slogan "Born in the USA = citizen!" outside the U.S. Supreme Court building as the court hears oral arguments on the legality of the Trump administration's effort to limit birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants, in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 1, 2026. Credit: REUTERS/Kylie Cooper

Popok is joined by David Fox, Litigation Partner with Marc Elias' Elias Law Group to brief our audience about 2 cases he briefed at the US Supreme Court, one on Mail in Ballots and the other on dark money in politics. Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/@LegalAFMTN?sub_confirmation=1 Become a member of Legal AF YouTube community: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJgZJZZbnLFPr5GJdCuIwpA/join Become a member of the Legal AF Substack: https://michaelpopok.substack.com/20off Follow Legal AF on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/legalafmtn.bsky.social Follow Michael Popok on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/mspopok.bsky.social Subscribe to the Legal AF podcast feed here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/legal-af-by-meidastouch/id1580828595 Subscribe to the Intersection with Michael Popok podcast feed here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-intersection-with-michael-popok/id1818863274 Subscribe to Unprecedented with Michael Popok and Dina Doll podcast feed here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/unprecedented-by-legal-af/id1867023089 Subscribe to Court of History with Sidney Blumenthal and Sean Wilentz podcast feed here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-court-of-history/id1867022920 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Where is Melania, where are the angry press conferences and denials, now that no one on the US Supreme Court— not even the 2 justices accused in their lifetimes of sex abuse — came to Trump's rescue and overturned him being found guilty and branded a sex abuser by a 9-0 jury? Popok takes a hard look at the testimony at trial of People Mag reporter Natasha Stoynoff, credited by the jury, and her links to Melania Trump, and explains why E Jean Carroll is likely to obtain the full, almost $100 million she is owed by Trump in the next several months. Plaud: Get up to 20% OFF with code: LEGALAF at https://Plaud.ai/legalaf Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The US Supreme Court gives Donald Trump sweeping new powers to fire government employees, but sides against him in cases regarding the Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook and mail-in voting ballots. Judges also rejected President Trump's request to appeal against a $5m civil verdict that he'd sexually abused and defamed the journalist E. Jean Carroll. Also: the US military reopens Venezuela's La Guaira port to help aid deliveries after the earthquakes. The right-wing candidate Keiko Fujimori wins Peru's presidential election. Six people are killed in a mass shooting in Germany. WhatsApp will soon give users the option to chat without revealing their phone numbers. Tennis players demand Wimbledon prize money is shared fairly, and the deadly fish with human-like teeth wreaking havoc on Greek fishermen. The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.ukPhoto: People gather outside the Supreme Court as it prepares to release decisions in multiple cases in Washington, DC, USA, 29 June 2026. Credit: EPA/Shutterstock

In breaking news, a 6-3 Majority of the US Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Roberts, has rejected Trump's efforts to rip away birthright citizenship from children born in this country to parents who are here in violation of immigration law or here temporarily. Popok explains that fireworks broke out in the opinion between Roberts and the Majority and Clarence Thomas (joined by Gorsuch and Alito) in the dissent. Select Quote: Save more than 50% at https://SelectQuote.com/legalaf today! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Kathy and Jim discuss the recent US Supreme Court's decision to reinstate the conviction of Pedro Hernandez who was convicted in his second trial of abducting and murdering Etan Patz - But who is the real killer of Etan Patz?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.