Podcasts about us supreme court

The top court in the US has ruled judges in lower courts have limited ability to block presidential orders. Also: DR Congo and Rwanda sign long-awaited peace deal, and should we be letting maggots eat our food waste?

Yesterday, the US Supreme Court released its decision in Trump v. CASA. This case was nominally about the legal question of so-called birthright citizenship, in light of a Trump Executive Order “ending” this practice. (In fact, America did not have birthright citizenship even prior to Trump's EO, and never has, but that's a different show.)In fact, the legal question here was not the issue of birth-right citizenship on the legal merits, but rather whether an unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior federal district court judge had the authority to issue a NATIONWIDE INJUNCTION against Trump's Executive Order, as opposed to any such injunction being limited to the actual parties before the court. FAIR WARNING: The majority DOES leave a YUGE vulnerability in this check on nationwide injunction, which I expect the insurrectionist judiciary to take full advantage of—more on that in a moment. Scores of unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior federal district court judge have been issuing nationwide, even international-wide, injunctions against a broad spectrum of Trump policies, even (or especially) when those courts lacked even the basic jurisdiction to hear the dispute before it.Today, that mostly ends, with the SCOTUS decision authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett laying out exactly why these nationwide injunctions are an outrageous overreach of the federal judiciary, contrary to hundreds of years of well-established American law. Even better, in the process of explaining why this is so, Barrett absolutely NUKES the dissent from Justice Ketanji “DEI” Jackson on both legal and intellectual grounds. It's a degree of in your face I don't think I've ever before seen delivered by one justice to another—and rightly so. (By the way, I expect the deserved heat of this check of Ketanji goes a long way to explaining why Barrett, also a woman, was chosen to author the decision.)Get Your FREE Copy of Our Best-Selling Book: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles"Visit Here: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook"You are wise to buy this material. I hope you watch it, internalize it, and keep it to the forefront whenever you even think of reaching for a gun"-Massad Ayoob (President of the Second Amendment Foundation) The #1 guide for understanding when using force to protect yourself is legal. Now yours for FREE! Just pay the S&H for us to get it to you.➡️ Carry with confidence, knowing you are protected from predators AND predatory prosecutors➡️ Correct the common myths you may think are true but get people in trouble​➡️ Know you're getting the best with this abridged version of our best-selling 5-star Amazon-rated book that has been praised by many (including self-defense legends!) for its easy, entertaining, and informative style.​➡️ Many interesting, if sometimes heart-wrenching, true-life examplesGet Your Free Book: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook

Texas can force users of porn websites to verify their age The law was challenged right up to the Supreme Court as they claimed it violated the free-speech rules of the First Amendment. Their argument was that adult viewers might be worried their private information or viewing history could be exposed, which is a deterrent from accessing the material. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the law, saying it's working to protect children, and the government has the authority to do that. The Texas Governor, Ken Paxton, calls the widespread access among children to hardcore pornography a public health crisis. Texas is one of 24 states that have passed age verification laws for online porn, forcing Pornhub to close down in the state. Salesforce's CEO claims 30-50% of the internal work is now done by AI That's a staggering statistic from CEO Mark Benioff. Unsure how that's measured, but he says AI is being widely used at the company for software engineering and customer service. He says the tech has allowed the company to hire fewer humans. Microsoft and Alphabet have claimed similar stats saying AI is creating about 30% of the new code on some projects. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jilted lovers and disrupted duck hunts provide a very odd look into the soul of the US Constitution.What does a betrayed lover's revenge have to do with an international chemical weapons treaty? More than you'd think. From poison and duck hunts to our feuding fathers, we step into a very odd tug of war between local and federal law.When Carol Anne Bond found out her husband had impregnated her best friend, she took revenge. Carol's particular flavor of revenge led to a US Supreme Court case that puts into question a part of the US treaty power. Producer Kelsey Padgett drags Jad and Robert into Carol's poisonous web, which starts them on a journey from the birth of the US Constitution, to a duck hunt in 1918, and back to the present day. It's all about an ongoing argument that might actually be the very heart and soul of our system of government.Special thanks toSignup for our newsletter!! It includes short essays, recommendations, and details about other ways to interact with the show. Sign up (https://radiolab.org/newsletter)!Radiolab is supported by listeners like you. Support Radiolab by becoming a member of The Lab (https://members.radiolab.org/) today.Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @radiolab, and share your thoughts with us by emailing radiolab@wnyc.org.Leadership support for Radiolab's science programming is provided by the Simons Foundation and the John Templeton Foundation. Foundational support for Radiolab was provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

In 2023, the state legislature of Tennessee passed a law called SB 1, which explicitly banned minors who identified as transgender from receiving puberty blockers and hormone therapy. It was also later amended to ban “gender-affirming surgeries”.The text of the bill prohibited health care providers from administering puberty blockers or hormones for the purpose of “enabling a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor's sex [or] treating purported discomfort or distress from a discordance between the minor's sex and asserted identity.”This law applied to anyone in the state below the age of 18—even if that child had obtained their parents' consent.However, the law did allow for some exceptions. Children who needed these treatments for medical reasons would still be allowed to have them. For instance, under the law as it was written, a child who experienced early onset puberty could still be given puberty blockers by their doctor. It's just that these interventions could no longer be given to children simply because they identified as transgender.Within days of passing, the law was challenged in court.Civil rights groups sued the state, arguing that the law was a violation of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. On the flip side, the state of Tennessee argued that this wasn't discrimination; rather, it was simply the regulation of medical care for minors—something well within the purview of the state.The case eventually made its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court where, after hearing both sides of the argument, there was a 6–3 split decision in favor of Tennessee—and in favor of the other 25 states that have similar laws on their books.Let's go through the details of this ruling together.

This episode is presented by Create A Video – The US Supreme Court handed down a ruling that limits nationwide injunctions by district court judges, which have been used to obstruct the President from carrying out his duties and agenda. Subscribe to the podcast at: https://ThePetePod.com/ All the links to Pete's Prep are free: https://patreon.com/petekalinershow Media Bias Check: If you choose to subscribe, get 15% off here! Advertising and Booking inquiries: Pete@ThePeteKalinerShow.com Get exclusive content here!: https://thepetekalinershow.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This episode is presented by Create A Video – The US Supreme Court ruled that parents in Maryland can opt their kids out of gender queer instructional sessions, at least until the case makes its way through the legal process. Plus, a Texas law requiring porn sites to verify users' ages is legal. Subscribe to the podcast at: https://ThePetePod.com/ All the links to Pete's Prep are free: https://patreon.com/petekalinershow Media Bias Check: If you choose to subscribe, get 15% off here! Advertising and Booking inquiries: Pete@ThePeteKalinerShow.com Get exclusive content here!: https://thepetekalinershow.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

//The Wire//2300Z June 27, 2025////ROUTINE////BLUF: SCOTUS SIDES WITH TRUMP ON LOWER COURTS ISSUING BLANKET RULINGS. PROTESTS IN EUROPE CONTINUE.// -----BEGIN TEARLINE------International Events-Europe: Various demonstrations and protests continue as usual. In Poland, demonstrations were conducted today regarding the migrant crisis, with Poles expressing dissatisfaction with the deportation of migrants to their country.Yesterday a small protest was reported in Ljubljana, Slovenia, following the NATO summit this week. This summit largely did not discuss much of any importance, with the exception of again urging member states to pledge 5% of their defense budget to NATO's collective defense. AC: Demonstrations in eastern European nations often end up being a good barometer for gauging how the east/west dynamic is developing. This time, Slovenians protested against NATO and the United States for a variety of reasons, but mostly due to the recent activities in the Middle East.Middle East: Tensions in Gaza have increased following a report from Israeli media claiming that IDF soldiers were ordered to target civilians seeking food aid. In the report, interviewed IDF soldiers explained the long-standing practices regarding the targeting of civilians, such as the practice of shooting civilians "who appeared to pose no threat".AC: The Israeli Military Advocate General has also ordered an internal investigation into these targeting efforts, and several nations have issued statements of condemnation regarding this practice. These reports come after months of complaints from international aid groups being kinetically targeted throughout the region.-HomeFront-Washington D.C. - This morning the US Supreme Court issued a few rulings of note. SCOTUS ruled in favor of President Trump concerning his lawsuit to prevent activist judges from exceeding their jurisdictions to issue rulings more broad than the initial scope of the initial lawsuit. In effect, this means that President Trump's executive order to ban birthright citizenship for illegals and for those on temporary visas is in effect.Similarly, this morning the White House announced that they will be terminating the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) of roughly 500,000 Haitian nationals, continuing the efforts from a few months ago to halt/slow immigration from Haiti under humanitarian programs.-----END TEARLINE-----Analyst Comments: The SCOTUS did not address the merits of Trump's birthright citizenship Executive Order itself; this judgement only re-affirmed the long-standing policy of preventing judges from issuing judgements outside their jurisdiction. However, the follow-on effects of this judgement will be interesting to follow as this affects a few hot-button issues that is currently at the heart of American discourse (most notably immigration-related issues).Analyst: S2A1Research: https://publish.obsidian.md/s2underground//END REPORT//

Inhaltliche und personelle Neuausrichtung der SPD bei Parteitag nach schlechtem Bundestagswahlergebnis, Zweistufige Erhöhung des Mindestlohns laut zuständiger Kommission, Aussetzung des Familiennachzugs für Menschen mit subsidiärem Schutz, US-Supreme Court schränkt Möglichkeiten von einzelnen Richtern zur Blockade von Ankündigung von Präsident Trump ein, Israelische Regierung plant erneute Aussetzung von Hilfslieferungen für den Gazastreifen für zwei Tage, Slowakei blockiert bei EU-Gipfel weitere Sanktionen gegen Russland, RTL plant Kauf des Bezahlsenders Sky Deutschland für 150 Millionen Euro, Lars Klingbeil und Bärbel Bas wieder an SPD-Spitze gewählt, Proteste in Venedig gegen die Hochzeit von Amazon-Milliardär Jeff Bezos, Eisbachwelle in München nach tödlichem Unfall einer Surferin wieder freigegeben, Das Wetter Hinweis: Der Beitrag zum Thema "RTL kauft Sky" darf aus rechtlichen Gründen nicht vollständig auf tagesschau.de gezeigt werden.

Lars Klingbeil büßt bei Wiederwahl zum SPD-Vorsitz deutlich Stimmen ein, Die Meinung, Bundestag stimmt für Aussetzung des Familiennachzugs von subsidiär Schutzbedürftigen, US-Supreme Court setzt Anordnungen von Bundesrichtern gegen Vorhaben von Präsident Trump aus, Anhaltende Kritik an Verteilzentren der umstrittenen "Gaza Humanitarian Foundation" im Gazastreifen, Emotionale und finanzielle Herausforderungen der häuslichen Pflege von Angehörigen, Weitere Meldungen im Überblick, Venedig zwischen Profit und Protest anlässlich der Hochzeit von Amazon-Gründer Jeff Bezos, Revolution der Fotografie vor 100 Jahren durch Leichtbildkamera Leica, Das Wetter

Bau der zweiten Gotthardröhre stockt, US-Supreme Court stärkt Trump gegen einzelne Bundesrichter, Dollar fällt auf Mehrjahrestief, Tenor Saimir Pirgu singt im Opernhaus Zürich

Lars Klingbeil büßt bei Wiederwahl zum SPD-Vorsitz deutlich Stimmen ein, Die Meinung, Bundestag stimmt für Aussetzung des Familiennachzugs von subsidiär Schutzbedürftigen, US-Supreme Court setzt Anordnungen von Bundesrichtern gegen Vorhaben von Präsident Trump aus, Anhaltende Kritik an Verteilzentren der umstrittenen "Gaza Humanitarian Foundation" im Gazastreifen, Emotionale und finanzielle Herausforderungen der häuslichen Pflege von Angehörigen, Weitere Meldungen im Überblick, Venedig zwischen Profit und Protest anlässlich der Hochzeit von Amazon-Gründer Jeff Bezos, Revolution der Fotografie vor 100 Jahren durch Leichtbildkamera Leica, Das Wetter

Effects on children in two rulings by the U-S Supreme Court...California Catholic Bishop speaks out on ICE raids at parish properties...and 6 Americans detained trying to send bibles to North Korea.

Inhaltliche und personelle Neuausrichtung der SPD bei Parteitag nach schlechtem Bundestagswahlergebnis, Zweistufige Erhöhung des Mindestlohns laut zuständiger Kommission, Aussetzung des Familiennachzugs für Menschen mit subsidiärem Schutz, US-Supreme Court schränkt Möglichkeiten von einzelnen Richtern zur Blockade von Ankündigung von Präsident Trump ein, Israelische Regierung plant erneute Aussetzung von Hilfslieferungen für den Gazastreifen für zwei Tage, Slowakei blockiert bei EU-Gipfel weitere Sanktionen gegen Russland, RTL plant Kauf des Bezahlsenders Sky Deutschland für 150 Millionen Euro, Lars Klingbeil und Bärbel Bas wieder an SPD-Spitze gewählt, Proteste in Venedig gegen die Hochzeit von Amazon-Milliardär Jeff Bezos, Eisbachwelle in München nach tödlichem Unfall einer Surferin wieder freigegeben, Das Wetter Hinweis: Der Beitrag zum Thema "RTL kauft Sky" darf aus rechtlichen Gründen nicht vollständig auf tagesschau.de gezeigt werden.

Racism is ugly and must be fought. Not a controversial statement, right? What if racism rebranded itself as “anti-racism”? Such is what the Asian-American community is facing and no place has been more of a flash-point for that than Northern Virginia's Thomas Jefferson High School For Science And Technology. This prestigious STEM school has been at the center of a battle between the Virginia Department of Education's “anti-racism” directives from the Terry McAuliffe administration and the Asian-American parents that brought suit because their kids were denied admission.  Despite the US Supreme Court passing on their case last year, the Department of Justice has opened an investigation into the allegations. We sit down with Helen Raleigh, a child of Communist China who escaped to the US after coming to America as a college student. Her most recent book is titled “Not Outsiders” and she visited with us at Freedomfest in Palm Springs to talk about the quite racial prejudices the Asian American community faces. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A weekly magazine-style radio show featuring the voices and stories of Asians and Pacific Islanders from all corners of our community. The show is produced by a collective of media makers, deejays, and activists. Tonight Producer Swati Rayasam showcases a community panel of how discriminatory exclusion policies during times of heightened fears of national security and safety have threatened our communities in the past, and how the activities of the current administration threaten our core constitutional rights, raising the specter of politicization and polarization of citizenship, immigration visas, naturalization rights, and the right to free speech.   Deport. Exclude. Revoke. Imprison – “Wong Kim Ark is for All of Us” SHOW TRANSCRIPT Swati Rayasam: You are tuned in to APEX Express on KPFA. My name is Swati Rayasam and I'm back as your special producer for this episode. Tonight we have an incredible community panel titled Deport. Exclude. Revoke. Imprison. This panel explores the history of how discriminatory exclusion policies during times of heightened fears of national security and [00:01:00] safety have threatened our communities in the past, and how the activities of the current administration threaten our core constitutional rights, raising the specter of politicization and polarization of citizenship, immigration visas, naturalization rights, and the right to free speech. I'll pass it on to UC Berkeley Ethnic Studies Professor Mike Chang to kick us off. Mike and Harvey: We're starting on Berkeley time, right on time at three 10, and I want to introduce Harvey Dong. Harvey Dong: Okay. The sponsors for today's event include, AADS- Asian American and Diaspora studies program, uc, Berkeley, Asian American Research Center, the Center for Race and Gender Department of Ethnic Studies- all part of uc, Berkeley. Off campus, we have the following community groups. Chinese for Affirmative Action, Asian Law Caucus, [00:02:00] Asian Prisoners Support Committee, and East Wind Books. Okay, so that's, quite a few in terms of coalition people coming together. My name is Harvey Dong and I'm also a lecturer in the AADS program and part of the ethnic studies department. I can say that I exist here as the result of birthright citizenship won by Ancestor Wong Kim Ark in 1898. Otherwise, I would not be here. We want to welcome everyone here today, for this important panel discussion titled: Deport, Exclude, Revoke, Imprison – Immigration and citizenship rights during crisis. Yes, we are in a deep crisis today. The Chinese characters for crisis is way G in Mandarin or way gay in [00:03:00] Cantonese, which means danger and opportunity. We are in a moment of danger and at the same time in a moment of opportunity. Our communities are under attack from undocumented, documented, and those with citizenship. We see urgency in coming together. In 1898, the US Supreme Court case, US versus Wong Kim Ark held that under the 14th Amendment birthright, citizenship applies to all people born in the United States. Regardless of their race or their parents' national origin or immigration status. On May 15th this year, the Supreme Court will hear a President Donald Trump's request to implement an executive order that will end birthright citizenship already before May 15th, [00:04:00] deportations of US citizen children are taking place. Recently, three US citizen children, one 2-year-old with cancer have been deported with their undocumented parents. The numbers of US citizen children are much higher being deported because it's less covered in the press. Unconstitutional. Yes, definitely. And it's taking place now. Also today, more than 2.7 million southeast Asian Americans live in the US but at least 16,000 community members have received final orders of deportation, placing their lives and families in limbo. This presents a mental health challenge and extreme economic hardship for individuals and families who do not know whether their next day in the US will be their last. Wong Kim Ark's [00:05:00] struggle and the lessons of Wong Kim Ark, continue today. His resistance provides us with a grounding for our resistance. So they say deport, exclude, revoke, imprison. We say cease and desist. You can say that every day it just seems like the system's gone amuk. There's constant attacks on people of color, on immigrants and so forth. And our only solution, or the most important solution is to resist, legally resist, but also to protest, to demand cease and desist. Today brings together campus and community people. We want you all to be informed because if you're uninformed , you can't do anything. Okay? You have to know where things are at. It's nothing new. What they're trying to do, in 1882, [00:06:00] during times of economic crisis, they scapegoated Asian Americans. Today there's economic, political crisis. And the scapegoating continues. They're not doing anything new. You know, it's old stuff, but we have to realize that, and we have to look at the past in terms of what was done to fight it and also build new solidarities today. Wong Kim Ark did not take his situation sitting down. He went through, lots of obstacles. He spent three months in Angel Island he was arrested after he won his case because he was constantly being harassed wherever he went. His kids when they came over were also, spotted as being Wong Kim Ark's, children, and they too had to spend months at Angel Island. So Wong Kim Ark did not take his situation sitting down. We need to learn from him today. Our [00:07:00] next, special guest is Mr. Norman Wong, a good friend of mine. He was active here in the third world Liberation Front strike that led to ethnic studies. He did a lots of work for the development of Asian American studies and we've been out in touch for about, what, 40 years? So I'm really happy that he's able to come back to Berkeley and to talk about yourself, if you wish, maybe during the Q and a, but to talk about , the significance of your great-grandfather's case. Okay, so Norman Wong, let's give him a hand. Norman Wong: Hello, my name's Norman Wong. I'm the great grandson, Wong Kim Ark. Wong Kim Ark was [00:08:00] born in the USA, like my great-grandfather. I, too was born American in the same city, San Francisco, more than 75 years after him. We are both Americans, but unlike him, my citizenship has never been challenged. His willingness to stand up and fight made the difference for his struggles, my humble thanks. Wong Kim Ark however, was challenged more than once. In late 1889 as an American, he traveled to China in July, 1890. He returned to his birth city. He had his papers and had no problems with reentry. In 1895, after a similar trip, he was stopped from disembarking and was placed into custody for five months aboard ship in port. [00:09:00] Citizenship denied, the reason the Chinese exclusion Act 1882. He had to win this case in district court, provide $250 bail and then win again in the United States Supreme Court, March 28th, 1898. Only from these efforts, he was able to claim his citizenship granted by birthright from the 14th Amendment and gain his freedom. That would not be the last challenge to his being American. My mother suffered similar treatment. She like my great-grandfather, was born in America. In 1942, she was forced with her family and thousands of other Japanese Americans to relocation camps an experience unspoken by her family. [00:10:00] I first learned about Japanese American internment from history books. Executive order 9066 was the command. No due process, citizenship's rights stripped. She was not American enough. Now we have executive order 14160. It is an attack on birthright citizenship. We cannot let this happen. We must stand together. We are a nation of immigrants. What kind of nation are we to be with stateless children? Born to no country. To this, I say no. We as Americans need to embrace each other and [00:11:00] cherish each new life. Born in the USA. Thank you. Harvey Dong: Thank you, Norman. And Annie Lee, will moderate, the following panel, involving campus and community representatives who will be sharing their knowledge and experience. Annie Lee, Esquire is an attorney. She's also the, managing director of policy for Chinese Affirmative Action, and she's also, heavily involved in the birthright citizenship issue. Annie Lee: Thank you so much Harvey for that very warm welcome and thank you again to Norman for your remarks. I think it's incredible that you're speaking up at this moment, to preserve your ancestors' legacy because it impacts not just you and him, but all of us [00:12:00] here. So thank you. As Harvey said, my name is Annie Lee and I have this honor of working with this amazing panel of esteemed guest we have today. So I will ask each of them to introduce themselves. And I will start, because I would love to hear your name, pronouns. Title and organization as well as your personal or professional relationship with the US Immigration System. So my name's Annie. I use she her pronouns. I'm the managing Director of policy at Chinese for Affirmative Action, which is a non-profit based in San Francisco Chinatown. We provide direct services to the monolingual working class Chinese community, and also advocate for policies to benefit all Asian Americans. My relationship with the immigration system is I am the child of two Chinese immigrants who did not speak English. And so I just remember lots of time spent on the phone when I was a kid with INS, and then it became U-S-C-I-S just trying to ask them what happened to [00:13:00] a family member's application for naturalization, for visas so I was the interpreter for them growing up and even today. I will pass it to Letty. Leti Volpp: Hi everybody. Thank you so much, Annie. Thank you Harvey. Thank you, Norman. That was profoundly moving to hear your remarks and I love the way that you framed our conversation, Harvey. I'm Leti Volpp. I am the Robert d and Leslie k Raven, professor of Law and Access to Justice at the Berkeley Law, school. I'm also the director of the campus wide , center for Race and Gender, which is a legacy of the Third World Liberation Front, and the 1999, student movement, that led to the creation of the center. I work on immigration law and citizenship theory, and I am the daughter, second of four, children of my mother who was an immigrant from China, and my father who was an immigrant [00:14:00] from Germany. So I'll pass it. Thank you. Ke Lam: Thank you. Thank you all for being here. Thank you, Norman. So my name's Key. I go by he, him pronouns or Nghiep “Ke” Lam, is my full name. I work for an organization called Asian Prison Support Committee. It's been around for like over two decades now, and it started behind three guys advocating for ethics study, Asian and Pacific Islander history. And then it was starting in San Quent State Prison. All three of them pushed for ethics study, hard and the result is they all was put into solitary confinement. And many years later, after all three got out, was Eddie Zang, Mike Romero and Mike no. And when they got out, Eddie came back and we pushed for ethics study again, and we actually got it started in 2013. And it's been going on to today. Then the programs is called Roots, restoring our Original True Self. So reconnecting with who we are. And one of Eddie's main, mottos that really stuck with me. He said, we need to all connect to our chi, right? And I'm like, okay, I understand what chi is, and he said no. He [00:15:00] said, you need to connect to your culture, your history, which result to equal your identity, who you are as a person. So, the more we study about our history and our culture, like, birthright citizen, it empower us to know, who we are today. Right? And also part of that is to how do we take down the veil of shame in our community, the veil of trauma that's impacting our community as well. We don't talk about issue that impact us like immigration. So I'm a 1.5 generation. So I was born in Vietnam from Chinese family that migrant from China to Vietnam started business after the fall of Vietnam War. We all got kicked out but more than that, I am directly impacted because I am a stranded deportee, somebody that got their, legal status taken away because of criminal conviction. And as of any moment now, I could actually be taken away. So I live in that, right at that threshold of like uncertainty right now. And the people I work with, which are hundreds of people, are fixing that same uncertainty.[00:16:00] Annie Lee: Thank you, Ke. I'm gonna pass it to our panelists who are joining us virtually, including Bun. Can you start and then we'll pass it to Chris after. Bun: Hey everybody, thank you for having me. My name is Bun. I'm the co-director of Asian Prison Support Committee. I'm also, 1.5 generation former incarcerated and under, direct impact of immigration. Christopher Lapinig: Hi everyone. My name is Christopher Lapinig, my pronouns are he, him and Sha. I am a senior staff attorney on the Democracy and National Initiatives Team at Asian Law Caucus, which you may know is the country's first and oldest legal aid in civil rights organization, dedicated to serving, low income immigrant and underserved AAPI communities. In terms of my connection to the immigration system, I am, I also am a beneficiary of a birthright citizenship, and my parents are both immigrants from the Philippines. I was born in New York City. My [00:17:00] extended family spans both in the US and the Philippines. After graduating law school and clerking, my fellowship project was focused on providing litigation and immigration services to, survivors of labor trafficking in the Filipino community. While working at Asian Americans Advancing Justice Los Angeles, I also was engaged in, class action litigation, challenging the first Trump administration's practices, detaining immigrants in the Vietnamese and Cambodian communities. Annie Lee: Thank you, Chris. Thank you Bun. Let's start off by talking about birthright citizenship since it's a big topic these days. On the very, very first day of Trump's administration, he issued a flurry of executive orders, including one that would alter birthright citizenship. But I wanna take us back to the beginning because why do we have this right? It is a very broad right? If you were born in the United States, you are an American citizen. Where does that come from? So I wanna pose the first question to Letty to talk about the [00:18:00] origins of birthright citizenship., Leti Volpp: Very happy to. So what's being fought about is a particular clause in the Constitution and the 14th Amendment, which says, all persons born are naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. Okay, so that's the text. There's been a very long understanding of what this text means, which says that regardless of the immigration status of one's parents, all children born here are entitled to birthright citizenship with three narrow exceptions, which I will explain. So the Trump administration executive order, wants to exclude from birthright citizenship, the children of undocumented immigrants, and the children of people who are here on lawful temporary visas. So for example, somebody here on an [00:19:00] F1 student visa, somebody on a H one B worker visa, somebody here is a tourist, right? And basically they're saying we've been getting this clause wrong for over a hundred years. And I will explain to you why I think they're making this very dubious argument. Essentially when you think about where the 14th amendment came from, in the United States, in the Antebellum era, about 20% of people were enslaved and there were lots of debates about citizenship. Who should be a citizen? Who could be a citizen? And in 1857, the Supreme Court issued a decision in a case called Dread Scott, where they said that no person who was black, whether free or enslaved, could ever be a citizen. The Civil War gets fought, they end slavery. And then the question arose, well, what does this mean for citizenship? Who's a citizen of the United States? And in 1866, Congress [00:20:00] enacts a law called the Civil Rights Act, which basically gave rights to people that were previously denied and said that everybody born in the United States is a birthright citizen. This gets repeated in the 14th Amendment with the very important interpretation of this clause in Norman's great-grandfather's case, the case of Wong Kim Ark. So this came before the Supreme Court in 1898. If you think about the timing of this, the federal government had basically abandoned the reconstruction project, which was the project of trying to newly enfranchised, African Americans in the United States. The Supreme Court had just issued the decision, Plessy versus Ferguson, which basically legitimated the idea that, we can have separate, but equal, as a doctrine of rights. So it was a nation that was newly hostile to the goals of the Reconstruction Congress, and so they had this case come before them, whereas we heard [00:21:00] from Norman, we have his great-grandfather born in San Francisco, Chinatown, traveling back and forth to China. His parents having actually left the United States. And this was basically presented as a test case to the Supreme Court. Where the government tried to argue, similar to what the Trump administration is arguing today, that birthright citizenship, that clause does not guarantee universal birthright citizenship saying that children of immigrants are not subject to the jurisdiction thereof, not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States because their parents are also not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The Supreme Court took over a year to decide the case. They knew that it would be controversial, and the majority of the court said, this provision is clear. It uses universal language. It's intended to apply to children of all immigrants. One of the things that's interesting about [00:22:00] what the, well I'll let Chris actually talk about what the Trump administration, is trying to do, but let me just say that in the Wong Kim Ark decision, the Supreme Court makes very clear there only three narrow exceptions to who is covered by the 14th Amendment. They're children of diplomats. So for example, if the Ambassador of Germany is in the United States, and, she has a daughter, like her daughter should not become a birthright citizen, right? This is why there's diplomatic immunity. Why, for example, in New York City, there are millions of dollars apparently owed to the city, in parking tickets by ambassadors who don't bother to pay them because they're not actually subject to the jurisdiction in the United States. Okay? Second category, children of Native Americans who are seen as having a sovereign relationship of their own, where it's like a nation within a nation, kind of dynamic, a country within a country. And there were detailed conversations in the congressional debate about the [00:23:00] 14th Amendment, about both of these categories of people. The third category, were children born to a hostile invading army. Okay? So one argument you may have heard people talk about is oh, I think of undocumented immigrants as an invading army. Okay? If you look at the Wong Kim Ark decision, it is very clear that what was intended, by this category of people were a context where the hostile invading army is actually in control of that jurisdiction, right? So that the United States government is not actually governing that space so that the people living in it don't have to be obedient, to the United States. They're obedient to this foreign power. Okay? So the thread between all three of these exceptions is about are you having to be obedient to the laws of the United States? So for example, if you're an undocumented immigrant, you are subject to being criminally prosecuted if you commit a crime, right? Or [00:24:00] you are potentially subjected to deportation, right? You have to obey the law of the United States, right? You are still subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Okay? But the Trump administration, as we're about to hear, is making different arguments. Annie Lee: Thank you so much, Leti for that historical context, which I think is so important because, so many different communities of color have contributed to the rights that we have today. And so what Leti is saying here is that birthright citizenship is a direct result of black liberation and fighting for freedom in the Civil War and making sure that they were then recognized as full citizens. And then reinforced, expanded, by Wong Kim Ark. And now we are all beneficiaries and the vast majority of Americans get our citizenship through birth. Okay? That is true for white people, black people. If you're born here, you get your ci. You don't have to do anything. You don't have to go to court. You don't have to say anything. You are a US citizen. And now as Leti referenced, there's this fringe legal theory that, thankfully we've got lawyers like [00:25:00] Chris who are fighting this. So Chris, you're on the ALC team, one of many lawsuits against the Trump administration regarding this unlawful executive order. Can you tell us a little bit about the litigation and the arguments, but I actually really want you to focus on what are the harms of this executive order? Sometimes I think particularly if you are a citizen, and I am one, sometimes we take what we have for granted and you don't even realize what citizenship means or confers. So Chris, can you talk about the harms if this executive order were to go through? Christopher Lapinig: Yeah. As Professor Volpp sort of explained this executive order really is an assault on a fundamental constitutional right that has existed for more than a hundred years at this point, or, well, about 125 years. And if it is allowed to be implemented, the harms would really be devastating and far reach. So first, you know, children born in the us, the [00:26:00] parents without permanent status, as permissible said, would be rendered effectively stateless, in many cases. And these are of course, children, babies who have never known any other home, yet they would be denied the basic rights of citizen. And so the order targets a vast range of families, and not just undocument immigrants, but also those with work visas, student visas, humanitarian productions like TPS, asylum seekers, fleeing persecution, DACA recipients as well. And a lot of these communities have deep ties to Asian American community. To our history, and of course are, essential part, of our social fabric. In practical terms, children born without birthright citizenship would be denied access to healthcare through Medicaid, through denied access to snap nutritional assistance, even basic IDs like social security numbers, passports. And then as they grow older, they'd be barred from voting, serving on juries and even [00:27:00] working. And then later on in life, they might be, if they, are convicted of a crime and make them deportable, they could face deportation to countries that they never stepped, foot off basically. And so this basically is this executive order threatened at risk, creating exactly what the drafters of the 14th Amendment wanted to prevent the creation of a permanent underclass of people in the United States. It'll just get amplified over time. If you can imagine if there's one generation of people born without citizenship, there will be a second generation born and a third and fourth, and it'll just get amplified over time. And so it truly is just, hard to get your mind around exactly what the impact of this EO would be. Annie Lee: Thanks, Chris. And where are we in the litigation right now? Harvey referenced, a hearing at the Supreme Court on May 15th, but, tell us a little bit about the injunction and the arguments on the merits and when that can, when we can expect [00:28:00] that. Christopher Lapinig: Yeah, so there were a number of lawsuits filed immediately after, the administration issued its exec order on January 20th. Asian Law Caucus we filed with the ACLU Immigrant Rights Project. Literally we were the first lawsuit, literally hours after the executive order was issued. By early February, federal judges across the country had issued nationwide preliminary injunctions blocking implementation of the order. Our case is actually not a nationwide injunction. And so there're basically, I believe three cases that are going up to the Supreme Court. And, the Trump administration appealed to various circuit courts to try to undo these injunctions. But all circuit courts upheld the injunctive relief and and so now the Supreme Court is going to be hearing arguments on May 15th. And so it has not actually ruled on whether or not the executive order is constitutional, but it's going to. I mean, it remains to be seen exactly what they're going to decide but may [00:29:00] 15th is the next date is the big date on our calendar. Annie Lee: Yeah. So the Trump administration is arguing that these judges in a particular district, it's not fair if they get to say that the entire country, is barred from receiving this executive order. Is that procedurally correct. Judges, in order to consider whether to grants an injunction, they have a whole battery of factors that they look at, including one, which is like likelihood of winning on the merits. Because if something is unconstitutional, it's not really great to say, yeah, you can let this executive order go through. And then like later when the court cases finally worked their way, like a year later, pull back from that. And so that's, it's very frustrating to see this argument. And it's also unfair and would be very messy if the states that had republican Attorneys General who did not litigate, why would you allow the executive order to go forward in those red states and not in these blue state? It really, I would say federalism run terribly amuck. Swati Rayasam: [00:30:00] You are tuned in to APEX Express on 94.1 KPFA, 89.3 KPFB in Berkeley,. 88.1. KFCF in Fresno and online@kpfa.org. Annie Lee: But anyway, let's see back off from the actual case because I think what we're really talking about and what Chris has alluded to is, these cases about birthright citizenship, all the immigration policy is essentially determining who belongs here. Who belongs here. That's what immigration policy is at its heart. And we see that the right wing is weaponizing that question, who belongs here? And they are going after very vulnerable populations, undocumented people, people who are formerly incarcerated. So Bun if you can talk about how, is the formerly incarcerated community, like targeted immigrants, targeted for deportation? What is going on with this community that I feel like most people might not know about? Thank [00:31:00] you. Bun: Yes. For our folks that are incarcerated and former incarcerated, we are the easiest target for deportation because we are in custody and in California, CDCR colludes with ICE and on the day that we are to be paroled they're at the door, cuffing us up and taking us to detention. I'm glad to hear Harvey say, this is a time of fear for us and also opportunity. Right now, our whole community, the Southeast Asian community, mainly are very effective with immigration. In the past 25 years, mostly it was the Cambodian community that was being targeted and deported. At this moment, they are targeting, all of the Southeast Asian community, which historically was never deported because of the politics and agreements, of the Vietnamese community. And now the Laos community thats more concerning, that are being targeted for deportation. Trump have opened a new opportunity for us as a community to join [00:32:00] together and understand each other's story, and understand each other's fear. Understand where we're going about immigration. From birthright to crimmagration. A lot of times folks that are under crimmigration are often not spoken about because of our cultural shame, within our own family and also some of our community member felt safe because the political agreements. Now that everybody's in danger, we could stand together and understand each other's issue and support each other because now we could see that history has repeated itself. Again, we are the scapegoat. We are here together fighting the same issue in different circumstances, but the same issue. Annie Lee: But let me follow up. What are these, historical agreements that you're talking about that used to feel like used to at least shield the community that now aren't in place anymore? Bun: Yeah. After the Clinton administration, uh, passed the IRA [immigration reform act] a lot of Southeast Asian nations were asked to [00:33:00] take their nationals back. Even though we as 1.5 generation, which are the one that's mostly impacted by this, had never even stepped into the country. Most of us were born in a refugee camp or we're too young to even remember where they came from. Countries like Cambodian folded right away because they needed the financial aid and whatever, was offering them and immediately a three with a MOU that they will take their citizens since the early two thousands. Vietnam had a stronger agreement, which, they would agree to only take folks that immigrated here after 1995 and anybody before 1995, they would not take, and Laos have just said no until just a few months ago. Laos has said no from when the, uh, the act was passed in 1995, the IRRIRA. Mm-hmm. So the big change we have now is Vietnam had signed a new MOU saying that they will take folks after 1995 [00:34:00] in the first administration and more recently, something that we never thought, happened so fast, was Laos agreeing to take their citizen back. And then the bigger issue about our Laos community is, it's not just Laos folks. It's the Hmong folks, the Myan folks, folks, folks that are still in danger of being returned back 'cause in the Vietnam War, they colluded and supported the Americans in the Vietnam War and were exiled out and kicked out, and were hunted down because of that. So, at this moment, our folks are very in fear, especially our loud folks, not knowing what's gonna happen to 'em. Ke Lam: So for folks that don't know what IRR means it means, illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. It actually happened after the Oklahoma bombing, which was caused by a US citizen, a white US citizen. Yeah. But immigration law came out of it. That's what's crazy about it. Annie Lee: Can you tell us, how is APSC advocating to protect the community right now because you [00:35:00] are vulnerable? Ke Lam: So we had to censor a lot of our strategies. At first we used to use social media as a platform to show our work and then to support our community. But the government use that as a target to capture our people. So we stopped using social media. So we've been doing a lot of on the ground movement, such as trying to get local officials to do resolutions to push Governor Newsom to party more of our community members. The other thing is we hold pardon workshops, so try and get folks to get, either get a pardon or vacate their sentence. So commute their sentence to where it become misdemeanor is not deportable anymore. Support letters for our folks writing support letters to send to the governor and also to city official, to say, Hey, please help pardon our community. I think the other thing we are actually doing is solidarity work with other organizations, African American community as well as Latin communities because we've been siloed for so long and we've been banned against each other, where people kept saying like, they've taken all our job when I grew up. That's what they told us, right? [00:36:00] But we, reality that's not even true. It was just a wedge against our community. And then so it became the good versus bad narrative. So our advocacy is trying to change it it's called re-storying you know, so retelling our story from people that are impacted, not from people, not from the one percenters in our own community. Let's say like we're all good, do you, are there's parts of our community that like that's the bad people, right? But in reality, it affects us all. And so advocacy work is a lot of different, it comes in a lot of different shapes and forms, but definitely it comes from the community. Annie Lee: Thanks, Ke. You teed me up perfectly because there is such a good versus bad immigrant narrative that takes root and is really hard to fight against. And that's why this administration is targeting incarcerated and formerly incarcerated folks and another group that, are being targeted as people who are accused of crimes, including Venezuelan immigrants who are allegedly part of a gang. So, Leti how is the government deporting [00:37:00] people by simply accusing them of being a part of a gang? Like how is that even possible? Leti Volpp: Yeah, so one thing to think about is there is this thing called due process, right? It's guaranteed under the constitution to all persons. It's not just guaranteed to citizens. What does it mean? Procedural due process means there should be notice, there should be a hearing, there should be an impartial judge. You should have the opportunity to present evidence. You should have the opportunity to cross examinee. You should have the opportunity to provide witnesses. Right? And basically Trump and his advisors are in real time actively trying to completely eviscerate due process for everybody, right? So Trump recently said, I'm doing what I was elected to do, remove criminals from our country. But the courts don't seem to want me to do that. We cannot give everyone a trial because to do so would take without exaggeration, 200 years. And then Stephen Miller said the judicial process is for Americans. [00:38:00] Immediate deportation is for illegal aliens. Okay. Quote unquote. Right. So I think one thing to notice is, as we're hearing from all of our speakers are like the boxes, the categories into which people are put. And what's really disturbing is to witness how once somebody's put in the box of being quote unquote criminal gang banger terrorists, like the American public seems to be like, oh, okay you can do what you want to this person. There's a whole history of due process, which exists in the laws which was created. And all of these early cases actually involved Asian immigrants, right? And so first they were saying there's no due process. And then in a case called Yata versus Fisher, they said actually there is due process in deportation cases, there's regular immigration court proceedings, which accord with all of these measures of due process. There's also a procedure called expedited removal, [00:39:00] which Congress invented in the nineties where they wanted to come up with some kind of very quick way to summarily exclude people. It was motivated by a 60 Minutes episode where they showed people coming to Kennedy Airport, who didn't have any ID or visa or they had what seemed to be fake visas and they were let into the United States. And then they disappeared, right? According to the 60 Minutes episode. So basically Congress invented this procedure of, if you appear in the United States and you have no documents, or you have what an immigration inspector thinks are false documents, they can basically tell you, you can leave without this court hearing. And the only fail safe is what's called a credible fear screening. Where if you say, I want asylum, I fear persecution, I'm worried I might be tortured, then they're supposed to have the screening. And if you pass that screening, you get put in regular removal [00:40:00] proceedings. So before the Trump administration took office, these expedited removal proceedings were happening within a hundred miles of the border against people who could not show that they had been in the United States for more than two weeks. In one of his first executive orders. Trump extended this anywhere in the United States against people who cannot show they've been in the United States for more than two years. So people are recommending that people who potentially are in this situation to carry documentation, showing they've been physically in the United States for over two years. Trump is also using this Alien Enemies Act, which was basically a law Congress passed in 1798. It's only been used three times in US history it's a wartime law, right? So it was used in 1812, World War I, and World War II, and there's supposed to be a declared war between the United States and a foreign nation or government, or [00:41:00] there's an incursion threatened by a foreign nation or government, and the president makes public proclamation that all natives of this hostile nation, 14 and up shall be liable to be restrained and removed as alien enemies. Okay? So we're obviously not at war with the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, right? They have not engaged in some kind of invasion or predatory incursion into the United States, but the Trump administration is claiming that they have and saying things like, oh, they're secretly a paramilitary wing of the Venezuelan government, even as the Venezuelan government is like cracking down on them. It's not a quasi sovereign, entity. There's no diplomatic relationships between Tren de Aragua and any other government. So these are legally and factually baseless arguments. Nonetheless, the administration has been basically taking people from Venezuela on the basis of tattoos. A tattoo of a crown of a [00:42:00] rose, right? Even when experts have said there's no relationship between what Tren de Aragua does and tattoos, right? And basically just kidnapping people and shipping them to the torture prison in El Salvador. As I'm sure you know of the case of Kimber Abrego Garcia, I'm sure we'll hear more about this from Christopher. There's a very small fraction of the persons that have been sent to this prison in El Salvador who actually have any criminal history. And I will say, even if they had a criminal history, nobody should be treated in this manner and sent to this prison, right? I mean, it's unbelievable that they've been sent to this prison allegedly indefinitely. They're paying $6 million a year to hold people there. And then the United States government is saying, oh, we don't have any power to facilitate or effectuate their return. And I think there's a struggle as to what to call this. It's not just deportation. This is like kidnapping. It's rendition. And there are people, there's like a particular person like who's completely [00:43:00] disappeared. Nobody knows if they're alive or dead. There are many people in that prison. People don't know if they're alive or dead. And I'm sure you've heard the stories of people who are gay asylum seekers, right? Who are now in this situation. There are also people that have been sent to Guantanamo, people were sent to Panama, right? And so I think there questions for us to think about like, what is this administration doing? How are they trying to do this in a spectacular fashion to instill fear? As we know as well, Trump had said oh, like I think it would be great when he met with Bukele if you build four more or five more facilities. I wanna house homegrown people in El Salvador, right? So this is all the more importance that we stick together, fight together, don't, as key was saying, don't let ourselves be split apart. Like we need a big mass coalition right? Of people working together on this. Annie Lee: So thank you leti and I think you're absolutely right. These Venezuelans were kidnapped [00:44:00] in the middle of the night. I mean, 2:00 AM 3:00 AM pulled out of bed, forced to sign documents they did not understand because these documents were only available in English and they speak Spanish, put on planes sent to El Salvador, a country they've never been to. The government didn't even have to prove anything. They did not have to prove anything, and they just snatch these people and now they're disappeared. We do have, for now the rule of law. And so Chris, there are judges saying that, Kimber Abrego Garcia has to be returned. And despite these court orders, the administration is not complying. So where does that leave us, Chris, in terms of rule of law and law in general? Christopher Lapinig: Yeah. So, I'm gonna make a little personal. So I graduated from Yale Law School in 2013, and you might know some of my classmates. One of my classmates is actually now the Vice President of the United States. Oh man. [00:45:00] Bless you. As well as the second lady, Usha Vance. And a classmate of mine, a good friend Sophia Nelson, who's a trans and queer, was recently on, I believe CNN answering a question about, I believe JD Vice President Vance, was asked about the administration's sort of refusal to comply with usual orders. Yeah. As we're talking about here and JD had said something like, well, courts, judges can't tell the president what he can't do, and sophia, to their credit, said, you know, I took constitutional law with JD, and, we definitely read Marbury Versus Madison together, and that is the semial sort of Supreme Court case that established that the US Supreme Court is the ultimate decider, arbiter, interpreter, of the US Constitution. And so is basically saying, I know JD knows better. He's lying essentially, in all of his [00:46:00] communications about, judicial orders and whether or not a presidential administration has to comply , with these orders. So, to get to your question though, it is of course unprecedented. Really. It is essentially, you know, it's not, if we not already reached. The point of a constitutional crisis. It is a constitutional crisis. I think it's become clear to many of us that, democracy in the US has operated in large part, and has relied on, on, on the good faith in norms, that people are operating good faith and that presidents will comply when, a federal judge issues an injunction or a decision. It kind of leaves us in an interesting, unprecedented situation. And it means that, lawyers, we will continue to litigate and, go to court, but we can't, lawyers will not save the country or, immigrants or communities. We need to think extensively and creatively. [00:47:00] About how to ensure, that the rule of law is preserved because, this administration is not, abiding by the longstanding norms of compliance and so we have to think about, protests, advocacy, legislatively. I don't have the answers necessarily, but we can't rely on the courts to fix these problems really. Annie Lee: Oof. That was very real, Chris. Thank you. But I will say that when there is resistance, and we've seen it from students who are speaking up and advocating for what they believe is right and just including Palestinian Liberation, that there is swift retaliation. And I think that's partly because they are scared of student speech and movement and organizing. But this is a question to all of you. So if not the courts and if the administration is being incredibly retaliatory, and discriminatory in terms of viewpoint discrimination, in people and what people are saying and they're scouring our social [00:48:00] media like, Ke warns, like what can everyday people do to fight back? That's for all of you. So I don't know who, which of you wants to take it first? Ke Lam: Oh man. I say look at history, right? Even while this new president, I wanna say like, this dude is a convicted felon, right? Don't be surprised at why we country is in the way it is, because this dude's a convicted felon, a bad business person, right? And only care about the billionaires, you know? So I'm not surprised how this country's ending up the way it is 'cause it is all about money. One way that we can stand up is definitely band together, marched on the streets. It's been effective. You look at the civil right movement, that's the greatest example. Now you don't have to look too far. We can actually, when we come together, they can't fight us all. Right? It is, and this, it's like you look at even nature in the cell. When things band together, the predators cannot attack everyone. Right? They probably could hit a few of us, but in the [00:49:00] long run, we could change the law. I think another thing is we, we, as the people can march to the courts and push the courts to do the job right, despite what's going on., We had judges that been arrested for doing the right thing, right? And so, no matter what, we have to stand strong just despite the pressure and just push back. Annie Lee: Thanks, Ke. Chris? Christopher Lapinig: What this administration is doing is you know, straight out of the fascist playbook. They're working to, as we all know, shock and awe everyone, and make Americans feel powerless. Make them feel like they have no control, make them feel overwhelmed. And so I think first and foremost, take care of yourself , in terms of your health, in terms of your physical health, your mental health. Do what you can to keep yourself safe and healthy and happy. And do the same for your community, for your loved ones, your friends and family. And then once you've done that do what you can in terms of your time, treasure, [00:50:00] talent to, to fight back. Everyone has different talents, different levels of time that they can afford. But recognize that this is a marathon and not necessarily a sprint because we need everyone, in this resistance that we can get. Annie Lee: Thank you, Chris. Leti Volpp: There was a New Yorker article called, I think it was How to Be a Dissident which said, before recently many Americans, when you ask them about dissidents, they would think of far off countries. But they interviewed a lot of people who'd been dissidents in authoritarian regimes. And there were two, two things in that article that I'm taking with me among others. One of them said that in surveying like how authoritarian regimes are broken apart, like only 3.5% of the population has to oppose what's going on. The other thing was that you should find yourself a political home where you can return to frequently. It's almost like a religious or [00:51:00] spiritual practice where you go and you get refreshed and you're with like-minded people. And so I see this event, for example as doing that, and that we all need to find and nurture and foster spaces like this. Thank you. Annie Lee: Bun, do you have any parting words? Bun: Yeah. Like Ke said, to fight back, getting together, understanding issues and really uplifting, supporting, urging our own communities, to speak Up. You know, there's folks that can't speak out right now because of fear and danger, but there are folks here that can speak out and coming here learning all our situation really give the knowledge and the power to speak out for folks that can't speak down [unclear] right now. So I appreciate y'all Annie Lee: love that bun. I was gonna say the same thing. I feel like there is a special obligation for those of us who are citizens, citizens cannot be deported. Okay? Citizens have special rights based [00:52:00] on that status. And so there's a special responsibility on those of us who can speak, and not be afraid of retaliation from this government. I would also urge you all even though it's bleak at the federal level, we have state governments, we have local governments. You have a university here who is very powerful. And you have seen, we've seen that the uni that the administration backs down, sometimes when Harvard hit back, they back down and that means that there is a way to push the administration, but it does require you all putting pressure on your schools, on your local leaders, on your state leaders to fight back. My boss actually, Vin taught me this. You know, you think that politicians, lead, politicians do not lead politicians follow. Politicians follow and you all lead when you go out further, you give them cover to do the right thing. And so the farther you push and the more you speak out against this administration, the more you give them courage to do the right thing. And so you absolutely have to do that. A pardon [00:53:00] is critical. It is critical for people who are formerly incarcerated to avoid the immigration system and deportation. And so do that. Talk to your family, talk to your friends. My parents, despite being immigrants, they're kinda old school. Okay guys, they're like, you know, birthright citizenship does seem kind of like a loophole. Why should people like get like citizenship? I'm like, mom, we, I am a birthright citizen. Like, um, And I think for Asian Americans in particular, there is such a rich history of Asian American civil rights activism that we don't talk about enough, and maybe you do at Berkeley with ethnic studies and professors like Mike Chang. But, this is totally an interracial solidarity movement. We helped bring about Wong Kim Ark and there are beneficiaries of every shade of person. There's Yik wo, and I think about this all the time, which is another part of the 14th Amendment equal protection. Which black Americans fought for that in San Francisco. [00:54:00] Chinatown made real what? What does equal protection of the laws even mean? And that case was Seminole. You've got Lao versus Nichols. Another case coming out of San Francisco. Chinatown about English learner rights, the greatest beneficiary of Lao v Nichols, our Spanish speakers, they're Spanish speaking children in schools who get access to their education regardless of the language they speak. And so there are so many moments in Asian American history that we should be talking about, that we should educate our parents and our families about, because this is our moment. Now, this is another one of those times I wanna pass it to Mike and Harvey for questions, and I'm so excited to hear about them. Mike and Harvey: Wow, thank you so much. That's a amazing, panel and thank you for facilitating annie's wanna give it of a great value in terms of that spiritual home aspect. Norm how does your great grandfather's , experience in resistance, provide help for us [00:55:00] today? Norman Wong: Well, I think he was willing to do it. It only took one, if no one did it, this, we wouldn't be having the discussion because most of us would've never been here. And we need to come together on our common interests and put aside our differences because we all have differences. And if we tried, to have it our way for everything, we'll have it no way for us. We really need to, to bond and bind together and become strong as a people. And I don't mean as a racial or a national group. Mm-hmm. I mean, we're Americans now. We're Americans here think of us as joining with all Americans to make this country the way it's supposed to be. The way [00:56:00] we grew up, the one that we remember, this is not the America I grew up believing in. I'm glad he stood up. I'm proud that he did that. He did that. Him doing that gave me something that I've never had before. A validation of my own life. And so yes, I'm proud of him. Wong Kim Ark is for all of us. It's not for me to own. Yeah. Wow. Really not. Thank you so much. Wong Kim Ark is for all of us. And, and , talking about the good , that we have here and, the optimism that Harvey spoke about, the opportunity, even in a moment of substantial danger. Thank you so much everybody. Mike and Harvey: This was amazing and really appreciate sharing this space with you and, building community and solidarity. Ke Lam: But is there any, can I leave with a chant before we close off? Oh yeah. Oh yeah. Yeah. Thank you so much. So this is a chant that we use on the ground all the time. You guys probably heard it. When I said when we fight, you guys said we [00:57:00] win when we fight. We win when we fight, we win. When we fight, we win up. Swati Rayasam: Thanks so much for tuning into APEX Express. Please check out our website at kpfa.org/program/apexexpress to find out more about the show tonight and to find out how you can take direct action. We thank all of you listeners out there. Keep resisting, keep organizing, keep creating, and sharing your visions with the world. Your voices are important. APEX Express is produced by Miko Lee, along with Jalena Keene-Lee, Ayame Keene-Lee, Preeti Mangala Shekar, Anuj Vaida, Cheryl Truong, Isabel Li, Ravi Grover, and me Swati Rayasam. Thank you so much to the team at KPFA for their support, and have a good [00:58:00] night.   The post APEX Express – 6.26.25-Deport. Exclude. Revoke. Imprison – Wong Kim Ark is for All of Us appeared first on KPFA.

U-S Supreme Court rules on Medicaid money for Planned Parenthood...Stanford stops "gender-affirming" surgeries for those under 19...and a new AP poll on religion in schools.

Today we're diving into the seventh installment of our eight-part, issue-based podcast series, and we will explore how nonprofits that operate in the health and disability rights space can boldly advance their missions through advocacy. Not only will we touch on recent developments in the news, but we'll also discuss various lobbying and non-lobbying strategies currently being used by nonprofit advocates working to improve healthcare access and disability rights.   Attorneys for this episode   Natalie Ossenfort Monika Graham Victor Rivera   Shownotes Current Events / Executive Orders ·      Trump Administration Directives on Health & Disability Rights o   The One Big Beautiful Bill introduces new eligibility requirements that will exclude an estimated 5.2 million adults from receiving Medicaid benefits. In total, over 8.6 million adults could lose healthcare coverage as a result of this bill. o   Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently dismissed the 17-member Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. o   Reports estimate that the Department of Health and Human Services has cut over 10,000 employees. o   The Trump administration has also taken recent actions that limit healthcare coverage for gender-affirming care in its crusade against gender ideology. ·      Supreme Court victory for disability rights o   The US Supreme Court unanimously held that children with disabilities should have an easier path to sue or seek recourse against schools for failing to provide ADA-compliant accommodations. This lower barrier of entry to bring legal claims represents a significant victory for disability rights groups.   Non-lobbying Advocacy Advocacy can take many forms, and lobbying is just one form. Your organization can engage in non-lobbying activities like: Organizing, educating the public, conducting research, executive branch and regulatory activities, working with your local state board of elections, training and litigation are just a few examples.   ·      Educating the Public o   The Arc's North Carolina chapter, an AFJ member organization, continues to shed light on how recent actions by the Trump administration may have a lasting impact on the rights of students with disabilities. ·      Holding a Rally o   This February[GU1] [VR2] [VR3] [GU4] , several health and disability rights groups held a Disability Advocacy Day at the Missouri Capitol. During the event, attendees urged the state to withdraw from a lawsuit brought on by 17 attorneys generals, including the Missouri AG. The groups want to keep federal protections for people with disabilities under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Section 504 provides funds for special accommodations for students and protects qualified individuals with disabilities. ·      Litigation as Advocacy o   Planned Parenthood of Montana is celebrating a recent legal victory in the abortion space. by The Montana Supreme Court blocked several anti-abortion laws from taking effect in Montana that would institute a 20-week abortion ban and place significant restrictions on abortion-inducing medications. o   A federal district judge granted a preliminary injunction temporarily blocking a Trump executive order that prohibits prison officials from providing gender-affirming hormone therapy and other accommodations to transgender people. The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU, the ACLU of DC, and the Transgender Law Center. Lobbying ·      Advocacy Days o   The Arc Minnesota recently organized a rally day at the Minnesota Capitol to protect disability funding. ·      Legislative Wins o   California: A coalition of nonprofit organizations successfully pushed SB634, the Unhoused Service Providers Protection Act, off the Senate floor. This bill is designed to increase protections for people and organizations that provide support to the unhoused. o   New York: The New York State Senate approved a bill that allows people facing terminal illnesses to end their lives on their own terms, which the bill's proponents say will ensure a measure of autonomy to New Yorkers in their final days. The bill has the support of several health and disability rights groups like Compassion and Choices.   Resources ·      Health and Equity: The Advocacy Playbook for Health and Disability Rights ·      Public Charities Can Lobby Factsheet ·      Practical Guidance: What your nonprofit needs to know about lobbying in your state ·      Investing in Change: A Funder's Guide to Supporting Advocacy ·      What is Advocacy? 2.0 ·      Seize the Initiative  

How did a Canadian author's alphabet book end up at the United States Supreme Court? And what does this mean for 2SLGBTQ+ books for kids in Canada? We welcome Robin Stevenson to discuss.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Apache Stronghold advocacy group appeals to the US Supreme Court again; school districts in Pima County face potentially steep budget cuts; a county lawmaker was sentenced to ten years in prison for embezzling tens of millions of dollars; and more...

Rudolph Carmenaty, the Deputy Commissioner for the Nassau County Department of Social Services, explores the legal legacy of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and how he clashed with the US Supreme Court over New Deal Legislation, guided the country thru the Great depression and World War II; and at the same time presided over internment camps for Japanese Americans during World War II.

President Trump announced on social media that Iran and Israel have agreed to a total ceasefire, and the US Supreme Court says the Trump administration will be allowed to quickly deport immigrants to countries they are not from. Also, New York City's Democratic mayoral primary is today. It's a tight race that's brought attention to the city's ranked-choice voting system.Want more comprehensive analysis of the most important news of the day, plus a little fun? Subscribe to the Up First newsletter.Today's episode of Up First was edited by Roberta Rampton, Gigi Douban, Andrea De Leon, Janaya Williams and Alice Woelfle. It was produced by Ziad Buchh, Nia Dumas and Christopher Thomas. We get engineering support from Zo van Ginhoven. And our technical director is Carleigh Strange.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Mahmoud “Hamas” Khalil, spokesman for an organization that advocates for the total eradication of Western civilization, is ordered by an unelected black-robed tyrannical inferior district court judge to be released from detention, where he was awaiting lawful deportation.  Khalil Armando Abrego-Garcia, an adjudicated MS-13 terrorist and credibly accused human trafficker and spouse abuser, is ordered released from ICE detention by a magistrate judge—basically a traffic court judge—after the US returned this terrorist to the US to face felony criminal human trafficking charges. The US Supreme Court—on a SUNDAY—freezes the order of an unelected, black-robed, tyrannical inferior district trial court judge to return to the US deported illegal migrants convicted of crimes as serious as murder, grape, and child predation—and that judge immediately announces that the SCOTUS ruling does not bind him, and his order remains in effect.WTF is going on with these courts, and what can America and our Article II Executive Branch President Donald Trump do about these rogue judges? Get Your FREE Copy of Our Best-Selling Book: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles"Visit Here: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook"You are wise to buy this material. I hope you watch it, internalize it, and keep it to the forefront whenever you even think of reaching for a gun"-Massad Ayoob (President of the Second Amendment Foundation) The #1 guide for understanding when using force to protect yourself is legal. Now yours for FREE! Just pay the S&H for us to get it to you.➡️ Carry with confidence, knowing you are protected from predators AND predatory prosecutors➡️ Correct the common myths you may think are true but get people in trouble​➡️ Know you're getting the best with this abridged version of our best-selling 5-star Amazon-rated book that has been praised by many (including self-defense legends!) for its easy, entertaining, and informative style.​➡️ Many interesting, if sometimes heart-wrenching, true-life examplesGet Your Free Book: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook

Trump says Israel and Iran violating ceasefire he announced, demands Israel stop bombing. Trump, US Senate Republicans face test as 'Big Beautiful Bill' deadline looms. Dangerous heat wave to envelop 170 million Americans through late June. US Supreme Court allows Trump to resume deportations to third countries. Florida to detain migrants in new Everglades facility dubbed ‘Alligator Alcatraz'. Jury Duty scam.

The US Supreme Court just came down with 6-3 decision giving The Felon President a victory in his mission to deport as many immigrants as possible, at all cost. Though a nationwide story, there is man right here in Wisconsin man who has become a victim of this draconian policy. Then, we are joined by the very amazing, new breaker, Todd Allbaugh and we're talking about the proposed cut (now pulled) to the UW System, as well as Senator Chris Kapenga's comments on security at the State Capitol. Matenaer On Air is a part of the Civic Media radio network and airs Monday through Friday from 9 -11 am across the state. Subscribe to the show as a podcast so you don't miss an episode! To learn more about the show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the show on Facebook, X and YouTube to keep up with Jane and the show! Guest: Todd Allbaugh

Part 3: We continue our in-depth examination of sex, gender, and separation of powers in the US Supreme Court decision Bostock v. Clayton County, GA 590 U.S. 644 (2020): the Republican dispute, how to understand it, and what to do about it. We cover Gorsuch's Opinion for the Court through his Roman Numeral II.B only in this episode, and stop at his II.C. We'll cover his II.C next time. Part 3. The Republican Professor is a pro-separation-of-powers-rightly-construed podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Tennessee's ban on pediatric gender affirming health care with a decision that lowered the bar for establishing its constitutionality and that imperils the rights of young trans patients in the 20 other states with similar laws — all despite the opposition of every major U.S. medical association. Brad Sears, Distinguished Senior Scholar of the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law, unpacks the ruling (interviewed by David Hunt). And in NewsWrap: most Australian gay and bisexual men and transgender women who have sex with men will finally be able to donate blood without a three-month-celibacy requirement, funding for suicide prevention programs targeting LGBTQ young people is being eliminated by the Trump administration, a federal judge continues to block the U.S. State Department from denying the option of an “X” gender marker on U.S. passports, U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance breaks the record for most blocked accounts on Bluesky in only two days after a transphobic post in support of the Supreme Court's Skrmetti ruling, and more international LGBTQ+ news reported this week by Ava Davis and Michael LeBeau (produced by Brian DeShazor). All this on the June 23, 2025 edition of This Way Out! Join our family of listener-donors today at http://thiswayout.org/donate/

Israel and Iran are trading attacks again and a CNN team witnessed it on the ground. Iran could use the Strait of Hormuz to retaliate against the US – we'll look at why it's so important. The US Supreme Court is expected to make some key rulings this week. Columbia graduate Mahmoud Khalil has spoken after being released from ICE custody. Plus, the health insurance industry is making some changes. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The conscience of a nation awakened for a moment when the bodies of 800 dead babies were discovered in a septic tank at a nun-run operation in Ireland. But what about the other 100,000,000 babies flushed into septic tanks around the world last year? But then, the UK parliament just voted to allow late term abortions, while everybody was up in arms over 800 dead babies  buried in the septic tank. Hypocrisy runs thick. We also find a biblical basis for the US Supreme Court decision on a Tennessee law that forbids parent from mutilating (ie. transgendering) their children for life. Parental rights only go so far. This program includes: 1. The World View in 5 Minutes with Adam McManus (America bombed Iran's nuclear facilities, U.K. House passes assisted suicide, Hockey player gives glory to God after winning Stanley Cup) 2. Generations with Kevin Swanson

Part 2: We continue our in-depth examination of sex, gender, and separation of powers in the US Supreme Court decision Bostock v. Clayton County, GA 590 U.S. 644 (2020): the Republican dispute, how to understand it, and what to do about it. We cover Gorsuch's Opinion for the Court through his Roman Numeral II A only in this episode, and stop at his II.B. We'll cover his II.B next time. Part 2. The Republican Professor is a pro-separation-of-powers-rightly-construed podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D.

The US Supreme Court has just issued a unanimous ruling in favor of a white, straight woman who was allegedly discriminated against at work.This new ruling opens the door wider for these types “reverse discrimination” cases — cases where the person getting discriminated against is part of the quote unquote majority group.Let's go through the details of the case together, as well as what this ruling means for all of us moving forward.

This episode is presented by Create A Video – The US Supreme Court dealt a blow to trans activists when it ruled that the state of Tennessee can legally ban trans procedures on children. And now the transgender movement is wondering if it went too far. Subscribe to the podcast at: https://ThePetePod.com/ All the links to Pete's Prep are free: https://patreon.com/petekalinershow Media Bias Check: If you choose to subscribe, get 15% off here! Advertising and Booking inquiries: Pete@ThePeteKalinerShow.com Get exclusive content here!: https://thepetekalinershow.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

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

Why aren’t Americans having babies, and can anything really change that? Economist and author Catherine Pakaluk joins CCV Policy Director David Mahan and Communications Director Mike Andrews to talk about her book Hannah’s Children, the roots of the birth dearth, and why baby bonuses and pro-natalist policies often fall short. Listen in for Catherine's take on how the state can become more pro-family through fixing housing, rethinking education, and restructuring welfare. Before the conversation, CCV President Aaron Baer joins David to break down a huge win at the US Supreme Court—the first major legal loss for the LGBT movement—and share highlights from the Fatherhood Commission press conference at the Ohio Statehouse, featuring leaders like former Florida Speaker Chris Sprowls, former NFL Viking Jack Brewer, and former Ohio State Buckeye Team Captain Kamryn Babb. Learn more about the Hope and a Future report at CCV.org/Hope. More about Catherine Pakaluk Catherine Ruth Pakaluk is an American economist and social philosopher at The Catholic University of America in Washington, DC. Catherine is author of the acclaimed ethnography Hannah’s Children: The Women Quietly Defying the Birth Dearth. Her work has been featured in The New Yorker, Slate, The Atlantic, The Wall Street Journal, Fox News, and more. She holds a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University. The mother of eight children, she is married to American philosopher Michael Pakaluk. They split their time between suburban Maryland and New Hampshire’s White Mountains.

Transgender rights suffered a major loss at the US Supreme Court after its opinion in the Skrmetti case. But some advocates for transgender rights found reasons within the opinion to believe their cause might fare better in future cases. Cases and Controversies hosts Kimberly Robinson and Lydia Wheeler get into the details of this opinion on the latest episode of their podcast. They also talk about the other opinions we got from the court this week, including one in which Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson issued an impassioned dissent on the issue of standing. Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases & Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Today's podcast begins with our incredible host, Mike Slater, going over a couple of different news stories with a particular focus on one regarding U.S. Senator Mike Lee's proposal to sell off federal land for "affordable housing". What is that and is it even a good idea. Slater has a TON of thoughts on this and you'll want to hear them.Following the opener, Mike gabs with Jonathan Skrmetti, the great state of Tennessee's Attorney General, about how he and others were able to notch a BIG win against childhood sex change insanity in the U.S. Supreme Court. A victory for common sense! Hooray!

Yesterday the US Supreme Court handed down a decision in the case of US v. Skremetti, which involved a challenge to a Tennessee law that banned the surgical mutilation of sad minors. US v. Skremetti (SCOTUS): https://tinyurl.com/eyjn3hebThis Tennessee law was challenged by various groups that wished to be free to surgically mutilate sad minors, and who claimed they had a Constitutionally-protected right to engage in such surgical mutilation of sad minors.You might not be surprised to hear that three of the Supreme Court justices agreed with this position, and that all of them were women:  Justice Kentaji “I'm not a biologist, how would I know what a woman is” Jackson, Justice Sonya “wise DEI Latina” Sotomayor, and Justice Elena “Never Been Married” Kagan. Fortunately, a majority of six of the Supreme Court justices agreed that there was no Constitutional right to surgically mutilate sad minors, and that the Tennessee legislature was therefore within its authority to ban this horrific and monstrous practice. Join me LIVE as I break down the highest-value portions of this lengthy SCOTUS opinion, with a particular focus on the brilliance that is always the work product of the great and powerful Justice Clarence Thomas. Get Your FREE Copy of Our Best-Selling Book: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles"Visit Here: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook"You are wise to buy this material. I hope you watch it, internalize it, and keep it to the forefront whenever you even think of reaching for a gun"-Massad Ayoob (President of the Second Amendment Foundation) The #1 guide for understanding when using force to protect yourself is legal. Now yours for FREE! Just pay the S&H for us to get it to you.➡️ Carry with confidence, knowing you are protected from predators AND predatory prosecutors➡️ Correct the common myths you may think are true but get people in trouble​➡️ Know you're getting the best with this abridged version of our best-selling 5-star Amazon-rated book that has been praised by many (including self-defense legends!) for its easy, entertaining, and informative style.​➡️ Many interesting, if sometimes heart-wrenching, true-life examplesGet Your Free Book: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook

Dr. Jared Ross, Do No Harm Senior Fellow Do No Harm is the largest and most impactful medical watchdog group in the country. SCOTUS Transgender Ruling. U.S Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law banning sex changes for minors.

Assembly Speaker and guy whose name is also a verb, Robin Vos has decided it would be a good idea to cut $87 million from the UW budget, because there isn't enough diversity and inclusion (our words, not his). The Bill for Billionaires seeks to make a cut to the 988 Helpline that helps LGBTQIA+ Youth, because of course it does. Every Thursday, Jim Santelle stops by the show to talk about all of the big stories come out of the world of law. Including the big decision from The US Supreme Court regarding gender affirming care in Tennessee, as well as the legality of ICE agents being masked . Matenaer On Air is a part of the Civic Media radio network and airs Monday through Friday from 9 -11 am across the state. Subscribe to the show as a podcast so you don't miss an episode! To learn more about the show and all of the programming across the Civic Media network, head over to https://civicmedia.us/shows to see the entire broadcast line up. Follow the show on Facebook, X and YouTube to keep up with Jane and the show! Guest: Jim Santelle

Today on Truth in Politics and Culture the US Supreme Court agrees with the Sixth Circuit in United States v. Skrmetti, that Tennessee can protect minors against mutilating transgender surgery, puberty blockers, and cross hormone treatments. President Trump is weighing the potential consequences of direct military intervention in Iran. I will talk about the pros and cons and give an analysis of intelligence on the state of Iran's nuclear program from IAEA, Israel and the US.

The US Supreme Court just struck a blow against child gender changes, and trans activists/TikTok influencers are NOT coping well. I break it down in this episode of the Brad vs Everyone podcast. Plus, the craziest segment on The View of all time and an INSANE incident involving Ana Kasparian on the "Her Take" podcast. Send me a voicenote: https://www.speakpipe.com/bradvseveryone Check out the merch: https://bp-shop.fourthwall.com/ Subscribe to my 2nd channel: https://www.youtube.com/@MoreBradPolumboSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

WV Attorney General JB McCuskey, Congressman Riley Moore, and Host Emeritus Hoppy Kercheval are guests today. Topics range from the impact of the US Supreme Court upholding Tenneseess's ban on gender transitions for children, the latest on the Israel/Iran conflict and Hoppy's thoughts on a number of topics. 

Trump weighs a US strike on Iran nuclear sites, The US Supreme Court upholds a Tennessee ban on youth gender medicine, Canada and India agree to re-appoint high commissioners, Rheinmetall and Anduril partner on European autonomous weapons development, Trump extends the TikTok deadline for a third time, The FBI shares China election interference claims with Congress, Elon Musk's X sues New York over a content moderation law, UK lawmakers vote to decriminalize abortion, Australia lifts its blood donation ban for gay and bisexual men, and a study finds a blood test can detect cancer three years before diagnosis. Sources: www.verity.news

Today on America in the Morning Trump Considering Iran Attack Plans President Trump says the United States is still weighing its options in the Middle East as the conflict between Israel and Iran continues, and said that no decision has been made whether the US will get involved militarily.  However, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that the President has privately approved of attack plans for Iran but has withheld a final order.    Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports.   Read Not Guilty A Massachusetts jury finds Karen Read not guilty in the 2022 murder of her Boston police officer boyfriend.  Jim Roope reports the verdict came nearly a year after a separate jury deadlocked over Read's involvement in the death.   SCOTUS Upholds Transgender Law Tennessee will be allowed to continue their state policy banning gender transition treatments for minors, following a ruling at the US Supreme Court.  Correspondent Haya Panjwani reports.  Screening Students Officials will reportedly begin screening the online presence of foreign nationals applying for educational visas to attend schools in the United States.  Correspondent Clayton Neville reports.   Erick Strengthens The first major hurricane of the 2025 season to threaten land has formed and is gaining strength.  Hurricane Erick powered up into a Category 3 major hurricane Wednesday evening as it bore down on the southern Mexico coast.   Compliance Demands For Travel Ban The Trump administration is demanding action from several dozen countries currently facing a proposed US travel ban.  Correspondent Lisa Dwyer reports without compliance, bans against travel from those nations into the US will go into effect.       Trump Sounds Off On Powell Concerns over tariffs and stagflation, a condition of stagnant economic growth, was the reason the Fed Chairman announced that interest rates would remain unchanged, drawing a rebuke from President Trump who has demanded that interest rates go lower to help spur the economy.  Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports that President Trump did not hold back his anger at Jerome Powell.   Hegseth On The Hot Seat As the American military prepares for the possibility of becoming involved in the Israel-Iran conflict, a congressional hearing on the Defense Department Budget brought some heated exchanges between lawmakers and U-S Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth Wednesday on Capitol Hill. Correspondent Clayton Neville reports.   She Was On The Hit List Saturday's shootings that claimed the lives of a Minnesota state lawmaker and her husband, and left another lawmaker and his wife seriously wounded, could have been much worse.  Correspondent Rich Johnson reports on another politician that was on the suspect's hit list.   Historic Team Sale One of sports' most iconic teams is changing hands in a record deal. Correspondent Gethin Coolbaugh reports on the sale of a 17-time NBA title-winning franchise, and the record-breaking price.   Latest Kohberger Hearing Despite a request from his defense attorney, the judge overseeing the trial of Bryan Kohberger indicated he will not delay the trial that is scheduled for August.   Finally  It pays to be a cheerleader.  The Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders are getting a 400 percent raise.   1975 was a summer that many were deeply afraid to go into the water after a blockbuster film about a gigantic shark hit theaters.  Kevin Carr has the 50th anniversary week of the classic movie – Jaws. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Roger Severino of the Ethics and Public Policy Center Ethics and Public Policy Center The post The US Supreme Court Ruling in a Transgender Case – Roger Severino, 6/18/25 (1691) first appeared on Issues, Etc..

The supreme leader of Iran has rejected President Donald Trump's call for the country to give in. The US Supreme Court has ruled on Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors. Federal prosecutors are set to make their case against the man charged with the Molotov cocktail attack in Boulder, Colorado. British lawmakers have voted to change UK abortion laws. And, a new study highlights the potential health risks of microplastic-polluted waters. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

We begin our in-depth examination of sex, gender, and separation of powers in the US Supreme Court decision Bostock v. Clayton County, GA 590 U.S. 644 (2020): the Republican dispute, how to understand it, and what to do about it. Part 1. The Republican Professor is a pro-separation-of-powers-rightly-construed podcast. The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D.

ICYMI: On Mobile Morning Dan Brennan and Dalton Orwig invited Bryan Comer from Tobias & Comer Law in to the studio to talk about Legal News: The End of the US Supreme Court term limit  Appointing a new District Judge

Congress is reeling after Democratic US Senator Alex Padilla was forcibly removed and handcuffed – all for the crime of trying to ask Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem a question. There are lots of moving parts to this story, so to help us understand what happened to the California Senator, we spoke with his counterpart, US Democratic Senator Adam Schiff of California.And in headlines: the US Supreme Court drops some fresh new opinions, the House votes to claw back funds for Daniel Tiger, and President Trump thwarts environmentalism in the Golden State.Show Notes:Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcastFollow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday

In a unanimous decision, the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of a catholic charity over in Wisconsin — and by doing so, they expanded the rights of all religious non-profits across the country. Let's go through the details of the case, what the specific issue at play was, what the Supreme Court ruling said, as well as what it means for you and I—people who don't necessarily live in Wisconsin.