Podcasts about virginia school

Dr. Linda Duska and Dr. Kathleen Moore discuss key studies in the evolving controversy over radical upfront surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Linda Duska: Hello, and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I am your guest host, Dr. Linda Duska. I am a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Virginia School of Medicine.  On today's episode, we will explore the management of advanced ovarian cancer, specifically with respect to a question that has really stirred some controversy over time, going all the way back more than 20 years: Should we be doing radical upfront surgery in advanced ovarian cancer, or should we be doing neoadjuvant chemotherapy? So, there was a lot of hype about the TRUST study, also called ENGOT ov33/AGO-OVAR OP7, a Phase 3 randomized study that compares upfront surgery with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval surgery. So, I want to talk about that study today. And joining me for the discussion is Dr. Kathleen Moore, a professor also of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Oklahoma and the deputy director of the Stephenson Cancer Center, also at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences.  Dr. Moore, it is so great to be speaking with you today. Thanks for doing this. Dr. Kathleen Moore: Yeah, it's fun to be here. This is going to be fun. Dr. Linda Duska: FYI for our listeners, both of our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode.  So let's just jump right in. We already alluded to the fact that the TRUST study addresses a question we have been grappling with in our field. Here's the thing, we have four prior randomized trials on this exact same topic. So, share with me why we needed another one and what maybe was different about this one? Dr. Kathleen Moore: That is, I think, the key question. So we have to level-set kind of our history. Let's start with, why is this even a question? Like, why are we even talking about this today? When we are taking care of a patient with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer, the aim of surgery in advanced ovarian cancer ideally is to prolong a patient's likelihood of disease-free survival, or if you want to use the term "remission," you can use the term "remission." And I think we can all agree that our objective is to improve overall survival in a way that also does not compromise her quality of life through surgical complications, which can have a big effect. The standard for many decades, certainly my entire career, which is now over 20 years, has been to pursue what we call primary cytoreductive surgery, meaning you get a diagnosis and we go right to the operating room with a goal of achieving what we call "no gross residual." That is very different – in the olden days, you would say "optimal" and get down to some predefined small amount of tumor. Now, the goal is you remove everything you can see.  The alternative strategy to that is neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery, and that has been the, quote-unquote, "safer" route because you chemically cytoreduce the cancer, and so, the resulting surgery, I will tell you, is not necessarily easy at all. It can still be very radical surgeries, but they tend to be less radical, less need for bowel resections, splenectomy, radical procedures, and in a short-term look, would be considered safer from a postoperative consideration. Dr. Linda Duska: Well, and also maybe more likely to be successful, right? Because there's less disease, maybe, theoretically. Dr. Kathleen Moore: More likely to be successful in getting to no gross residual. Dr. Linda Duska: Right. Yeah, exactly. Dr. Kathleen Moore: I agree with that. And so, so if the end game, regardless of timing, is you get to no gross residual and you help a patient and there's no difference in overall survival, then it's a no-brainer. We would not be having this conversation. But there remains a question around, while it may be more likely to get to no gross residual, it may be, and I think we can all agree, a less radical, safer surgery, do you lose survival in the long term by this approach? This has become an increasing concern because of the increase in rates of use of neoadjuvant, not only in this country, but abroad. And so, you mentioned the four prior studies. We will not be able to go through them completely. Dr. Linda Duska: Let's talk about the two modern ones, the two from 2020 because neither one of them showed a difference in overall survival, which I think we can agree is, at the end of the day, yes, PFS would be great, but OS is what we're looking for. Dr. Kathleen Moore: OS is definitely what we're looking for. I do think a marked improvement in PFS, like a real prolongation in disease-free survival, for me would be also enough. A modest improvement does not really cut it, but if you are really, really prolonging PFS, you should see that-  Dr. Linda Duska: -manifest in OS. Dr. Kathleen Moore: Yeah, yeah. Okay. So let's talk about the two modern ones. The older ones are EORTC and CHORUS, which I think we've talked about. The two more modern ones are SCORPION and JCOG0602. So, SCORPION was interesting. SCORPION was a very small study, though. So one could say it's underpowered. 170 patients. And they looked at only patients that were incredibly high risk. So, they had to have a Fagotti score, I believe, of over 9, but they were not looking at just low volume disease. Like, those patients were not enrolled in SCORPION. It was patients where you really were questioning, "Should I go to the OR or should I do neoadjuvant? Like, what's the better thing?" It is easy when it's low volume. You're like, "We're going." These were the patients who were like, "Hm, you know, what should I do?" High volume. Patients were young, about 55. The criticism of the older studies, there are many criticisms, but one of them is that, the criticism that is lobbied is that they did not really try. Whatever surgery you got, they did not really try with median operative times of 180 minutes for primary cytoreduction, 120 for neoadjuvant. Like, you and I both know, if you're in a big primary debulking, you're there all day. It's 6 hours. Dr. Linda Duska: Right, and there was no quality control for those studies, either. Dr. Kathleen Moore: No quality control. So, SCORPION, they went 451-minute median for surgery. Like, they really went for it versus four hours and then 253 for the interval, 4 hours. They really went for it on both arms. Complete gross resection was achieved in 50% of the primary cytoreduced. So even though they went for it with these very long surgeries, they only got to the goal half the time. It was almost 80% in the interval group. So they were more successful there. And there was absolutely no difference in PFS or OS. They were right about 15 months PFS, right about 40 months OS.  JCOG0602, of course, done in Japan, a big study, 300 patients, a little bit older population. Surprisingly more stage IV disease in this study than were in SCORPION. SCORPION did not have a lot of stage IV, despite being very bulky tumors. So a third of patients were stage IV. They also had relatively shorter operative times, I would say, 240 minutes for primary, 302 for interval. So still kind of short. Complete gross resection was not achieved very often. 30% of primary cytoreduction. That is not acceptable. Dr. Linda Duska: Well, so let's talk about TRUST. What was different about TRUST? Why was this an important study for us to see? Dr. Kathleen Moore: So the criticism of all of these, and I am not trying to throw shade at anyone, but the criticism of all of these is if you are putting surgery to the test, you are putting the surgeon to the test. And you are assuming that all surgeons are trained equally and are willing to do what it takes to get someone to no gross residual. Dr. Linda Duska: And are in a center that can support the post-op care for those patients. Dr. Kathleen Moore: Which can be ICU care, prolonged time. Absolutely. So when you just open these broadly, you're assuming everyone has the surgical skills and is comfortable doing that and has backup. Everybody has an ICU. Everyone has a blood bank, and you are willing to do that. And that assumption could be wrong. And so what TRUST said is, "Okay, we are only going to open this at centers that have shown they can achieve a certain level of primary cytoreduction to no gross residual disease." And so there was quality criteria. It was based on – it was mostly a European study – so ESGO criteria were used to only allow certified centers to participate. They had to have a surgical volume of over 36 cytoreductive surgeries per year. So you could not be a low volume surgeon. Your complete resection rates that were reported had to be greater than 50% in the upfront setting. I told you on the JCOG, it was 30%. Dr. Linda Duska: Right. So these were the best of the best. This was the best possible surgical situation you could put these patients in, right? Dr. Kathleen Moore: Absolutely. And you support all the things so you could mitigate postoperative complications as well. Dr. Linda Duska: So we are asking the question now again in the ideal situation, right? Dr. Kathleen Moore: Right. Dr. Linda Duska: Which, we can talk about, may or may not be generalizable to real life, but that's a separate issue because we certainly don't have those conditions everywhere where people get cared for with ovarian cancer. But how would you interpret the results of this study? Did it show us anything different? Dr. Kathleen Moore: I am going to say how we should interpret it and then what I am thinking about. It is a negative study. It was designed to show improvement in overall survival in these ideal settings in patients with FIGO stage IIIB and C, they excluded A, these low volume tumors that should absolutely be getting surgery. So FIGO stage IIIB and C and IVA and B that were fit enough to undergo radical surgery randomized to primary cytoreduction or neoadjuvant with interval, and were all given the correct chemo. Dr. Linda Duska: And they were allowed bevacizumab and PARP, also. They could have bevacizumab and PARP. Dr. Kathleen Moore: They were allowed bevacizumab and PARP. Not many of them got PARP, but it was distributed equally, so that would not be a confounder. And so that was important. Overall survival is the endpoint. It was a big study. You know, it was almost 600 patients. So appropriately powered. So let's look at what they reported. When they looked at the patients who were enrolled, this is a large study, almost 600 patients, 345 in the primary cytoreductive arm and 343 in the neoadjuvant arm. Complete resection in these patients was 70% in the primary cytoreductive arm and 85% in the neoadjuvant arm. So in both arms, it was very high. So your selection of site and surgeon worked. You got people to their optimal outcome. So that is very different than any other study that has been reported to date. But what we saw when we looked at overall survival was no statistical difference. The median was, and I know we do not like to talk about medians, but the median in the primary cytoreductive arm was 54 months versus 48 months in the neoadjuvant arm with a hazard ratio of 0.89 and, of course, the confidence interval crossed one. So this is not statistically significant. And that was the primary endpoint. Dr. Linda Duska: I know you are getting to this. They did look at PFS, and that was statistically significant, but to your point about what are we looking for for a reasonable PFS difference? It was about two months difference. When I think about this study, and I know you are coming to this, what I thought was most interesting about this trial, besides the fact that the OS, the primary endpoint was negative, was the subgroup analyses that they did. And, of course, these are hypothesis-generating only. But if you look at, for example, specifically only the stage III group, that group did seem to potentially, again, hypothesis generating, but they did seem to benefit from upfront surgery.  And then one other thing that I want to touch on before we run out of time is, do we think it matters if the patient is BRCA germline positive? Do we think it matters if there is something in particular about that patient from a biomarker standpoint that is different? I am hopeful that more data will be coming out of this study that will help inform this. Of course, unpowered, hypothesis-generating only, but it's just really interesting. What do you think of their subset analysis? Dr. Kathleen Moore: Yeah, I think the subsets are what we are going to be talking about, but we have to emphasize that this was a negative trial as designed. Dr. Linda Duska: Absolutely. Yes. Dr. Kathleen Moore: So we cannot be apologists and be like, "But this or that." It was a negative trial as designed. Now, I am a human and a clinician, and I want what is best for my patients. So I am going to, like, go down the path of subset analyses. So if you look at the stage III tumors that got complete cytoreduction, which was 70% of the cases, your PFS was almost 28 months versus 21.8 months. Dr. Linda Duska: Yes, it becomes more significant. Dr. Kathleen Moore: Yeah, that hazard ratio is 0.69. Again, it is a subset. So even though the P value here is statistically significant, it actually should not have a P value because it is an exploratory analysis. So we have to be very careful. But the hazard ratio is 0.69. So the hypothesis is in this setting, if you're stage III and you go for it and you get someone to no gross residual versus an interval cytoreduction, you could potentially have a 31% reduction in the rate of progression for that patient who got primary cytoreduction. And you see a similar trend in the stage III patients, if you look at overall survival, although the post-progression survival is so long, it's a little bit narrow of a margin.  But I do think there are some nuggets here that, one of our colleagues who is really one of the experts in surgical studies, Dr. Mario Leitao, posted this on X, and I think it really resonated after this because we were all saying, "But what about the subsets?" He is like, "It's a negative study." But at the end of the day, you are going to sit with your patient. The patient should be seen by a GYN oncologist or surgical oncologist with specialty in cytoreduction and a medical oncologist, you know, if that person does not give chemo, and the decision should be made about what to do for that individual patient in that setting. Dr. Linda Duska: Agreed. And along those lines, if you look carefully at their data, the patients who had an upfront cytoreduction had almost twice the risk of having a stoma than the patients who had an interval cytoreduction. And they also had a higher risk of needing to have a bowel resection. The numbers were small, but still, when you look at the surgical complications, as you've already said, they're higher in the upfront group than they are in the interval group. That needs to be taken into account as well when counseling a patient, right? When you have a patient in front of you who says to you, "Dr. Moore, you can take out whatever you want, but whatever you do, don't make me a bag." As long as the patient understands what that means and what they're asking us to do, I think that we need to think about that. Dr. Kathleen Moore: I think that is a great point. And I have definitely seen in our practice, patients who say, "I absolutely would not want an ostomy. It's a nonstarter for me." And we do make different decisions. And you have to just say, "That's the decision we've made," and you kind of move on, and you can't look back and say, "Well, I wish I would have, could have, should have done something else." That is what the patient wants. Ultimately, that patient, her family, autonomous beings, they need to be fully counseled, and you need to counsel that patient as to the site that you are in, her volume of disease, and what you think you can achieve. In my opinion, a patient with stage III cancer who you have the site and the capabilities to get to no gross residual should go to the OR first. That is what I believe. I do not anymore think that for stage IV. I think that this is pretty convincing to me that that is probably a harmful thing. However, I want you to react to this. I think I am going to be a little unpopular in saying this, but for me, one of the biggest take-homes from TRUST was that whether or not, and we can talk about the subsets and the stage III looked better, and I think it did, but both groups did really well. Like, really well. And these were patients with large volume disease. This was not cherry-picked small volume stage IIIs that you could have done an optimal just by doing a hysterectomy. You know, these were patients that needed radical surgery. And both did well. And so what it speaks to me is that anytime you are going to operate on someone with ovary, whether it be frontline, whether it be a primary or interval, you need a high-volume surgeon. That is what I think this means to me. Like, I would want high volume surgeon at a center that could do these surgeries, getting that patient, my family member, me, to no gross residual. That is important. And you and I are both in training centers. I think we ought to take a really strong look at, are we preparing people to do the surgeries that are necessary to get someone to no gross residual 70% and 85% of the time? Dr. Linda Duska: We are going to run out of time, but I want to address that and ask you a provocative question. So, I completely agree with what you said, that surgery is important. But I also think one of the reasons these patients in this study did so well is because all of the incredible new therapies that we have for patients. Because OS is not just about surgery. It is about surgery, but it is also about all of the amazing new therapies we have that you and others have helped us to get through clinical research. And so, how much of that do you think, like, for example, if you look at the PFS and OS rates from CHORUS and EORTC, I get it that they're, that they're not the same. It's different patients, different populations, can't do cross-trial comparisons. But the OS, as you said, in this study was 54 months and 48 months, which is, compared to 2010, we're doing much, much better. It is not just the surgery, it is also all the amazing treatment options we have for these patients, including PARP, including MIRV, including lots of other new therapies. How do you fit that into thinking about all of this? Dr. Kathleen Moore: I do think we are seeing, and we know this just from epidemiologic data that the prevalence of ovarian cancer in many of the countries where the study was done is increasing, despite a decrease in incidence. And why is that? Because people are living longer. Dr. Linda Duska: People are living longer, yeah. Dr. Kathleen Moore: Which is phenomenal. That is what we want. And we do have, I think, better supportive care now. PARP inhibitors in the frontline, which not many of these patients had. Now some of them, this is mainly in Europe, will have gotten them in the first maintenance setting, and I do think that impacts outcome. We do not have that data yet, you know, to kind of see what, I would be really interested to see. We do not do this well because in ovarian cancer, post-progression survival can be so long, we do not do well of tracking what people get when they come off a clinical trial to see how that could impact – you know, how many of them got another surgery? How many of them got a PARP? I think this group probably missed the ADC wave for the most part, because this, mirvetuximab is just very recently available in Europe. Dr. Linda Duska: Unless they were on trial. Dr. Kathleen Moore: Unless they were on trial. But I mean, I think we will have to see. 600 patients, I would bet a lot of them missed the ADC wave. So, I do not know that we can say we know what drove these phenomenal – these are some of the best curves we've seen outside of BRCA. And then coming back to your point about the BRCA population here, that is a really critical question that I do not know that we're ever going to answer. There have been hypotheses around a tumor that is driven by BRCA, if you surgically cytoreduced it, and then chemically cytoreduced it with chemo, and so you're starting PARP with nothing visible and likely still homogeneous clones. Is that the group we cured? And then if you give chemo first before surgery, it allows more rapid development of heterogeneity and more clonal evolution that those are patients who are less likely to be cured, even if they do get cytoreduced to nothing at interval with use of PARP inhibitor in the front line. That is a question that many have brought up as something we would like to understand better. Like, if you are BRCA, should you always just go for it or not? I do not know that we're ever going to really get to that. We are trying to look at some of the other studies and just see if you got neoadjuvant and you had BRCA, was anyone cured? I think that is a question on SOLO1 I would like to know the answer to, and I don't yet, that may help us get to that. But that's sort of something we do think about. You should have a fair number of them in TRUST. It wasn't a stratification factor, as I remember. Dr. Linda Duska: No, it wasn't. They stratified by center, age, and ECOG status Dr. Kathleen Moore: So you would hope with randomization that you would have an equal number in each arm. And they may be able to pull that out and do a very exploratory look. But I would be interested to see just completely hypothesis-generating what this looks like for the patients with BRCA, and I hope that they will present that. I know they're busy at work. They have translational work. They have a lot pending with TRUST. It's an incredibly rich resource that I think is going to teach us a lot, and I am excited to see what they do next. Dr. Linda Duska: So, outside of TRUST, we are out of time. I just want to give you a moment if there were any other messages that you want to share with our listeners before we wrap up. Dr. Kathleen Moore: It's an exciting time to be in GYN oncology. For so long, it was just chemo, and then the PARP inhibitors nudged us along quite a bit. We did move more patients, I believe, to the cure fraction. When we ultimately see OS, I think we'll be able to say that definitively, and that is exciting. But, you know, that is the minority of our patients. And while HRD positive benefits tremendously from PARP, I am not as sure we've moved as many to the cure fraction. Time will tell. But 50% of our patients have these tumors that are less HRD. They have a worse prognosis. I think we can say that and recur more quickly. And so the advent of these antibody-drug conjugates, and we could name 20 of them in development in GYN right now, targeting tumor-associated antigens because we're not really driven by mutations other than BRCA. We do not have a lot of things to come after. We're not lung cancer. We are not breast cancer. But we do have a lot of proteins on the surface of our cancers, and we are finally able to leverage that with some very active regimens. And we're in the early phases, I would say, of really understanding how best to use those, how best to position them, and which one to select for whom in a setting where there is going to be obvious overlap of the targets. So we're going to be really working this problem. It is a good problem. A lot of drugs that work pretty well. How do you individualize for a patient, the patient in front of you with three different markers? How do you optimize it? Where do you put them to really prolong survival? And then we finally have cell surface. We saw at ASCO, CDK2 come into play here for the first time, we've got a cell cycle inhibitor. We've been working on WEE1 and ATR for a long time. CDK2s may hit. Response rates were respectable in a resistant population that was cyclin E overexpressing. We've been working on that biomarker for a long time with a toxicity profile that was surprisingly clean, which I like to see for our patients. So that is a different platform. I think we have got bispecifics on the rise. So there is a pipeline of things behind the ADCs, which is important because we need more than one thing, that makes me feel like in the future, I am probably not going to be using doxil ever for platinum-resistant disease. So, I am going to be excited to retire some of those things. We will say, "Remember when we used to use doxil for platinum-resistant disease?" Dr. Linda Duska: I will be retired by then, but thanks for that thought. Dr. Kathleen Moore: I will remind you. Dr. Linda Duska: You are right. It is such an incredibly exciting time to be taking care of ovarian cancer patients with all the opportunities.  And I want to thank you for sharing your valuable insights with us on this podcast today and for your great work to advance care for patients with GYN cancers. Dr. Kathleen Moore: Likewise. Thanks for having me. Dr. Linda Duska: And thank you to our listeners for your time today. You will find links to the TRUST study and other studies discussed today in the transcript of this episode. Finally, if you value the insights that you hear on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please take a moment to rate, review, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. More on today's speakers:   Dr. Linda Duska  @Lduska Dr. Kathleen Moore Follow ASCO on social media:     @ASCO on X (formerly Twitter) ASCO on Bluesky   ASCO on Facebook     ASCO on LinkedIn     Disclosures of Potential Conflicts of Interest:    Dr. Linda Duska:   Consulting or Advisory Role: Regeneron, Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Ellipses Pharma  Research Funding (Inst.): GlaxoSmithKline, Millenium, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Aeterna Zentaris, Novartis, Abbvie, Tesaro, Cerulean Pharma, Aduro Biotech, Advaxis, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Leap Therapeutics  Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: UptToDate, Editor, British Journal of Ob/Gyn  Dr. Kathleen Moore: Leadership: GOG Partners, NRG Ovarian Committee Chair Honoraria: Astellas Medivation, Clearity Foundation, IDEOlogy Health, Medscape, Great Debates and Updates, OncLive/MJH Life Sciences, MD Outlook, Curio Science, Plexus, University of Florida, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Congress Chanel, BIOPHARM, CEA/CCO, Physician Education Resource (PER), Research to Practice, Med Learning Group, Peerview, Peerview, PeerVoice, CME Outfitters, Virtual Incision Consulting/Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Immunogen, AstraZeneca, Merck, Eisai, Verastem/Pharmacyclics, AADi, Caris Life Sciences, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Janssen Oncology, Regeneron, zentalis, Daiichi Sankyo Europe GmbH, BioNTech SE, Immunocore, Seagen, Takeda Science Foundation, Zymeworks, Profound Bio, ADC Therapeutics, Third Arc, Loxo/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation, Tango Therapeutics, Abbvie, T Knife, F Hoffman La Roche, Tubulis GmbH, Clovis Oncology, Kivu, Genmab/Seagen, Kivu, Genmab/Seagen, Whitehawk, OnCusp Therapeutics, Natera, BeiGene, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Day One Biopharmaceuticals, Debiopharm Group, Foundation Medicine, Novocure Research Funding (Inst.): Mersana, GSK/Tesaro, Duality Biologics, Mersana, GSK/Tesaro, Duality Biologics, Merck, Regeneron, Verasatem, AstraZeneca, Immunogen, Daiichi Sankyo/Lilly, Immunocore, Torl Biotherapeutics, Allarity Therapeutics, IDEAYA Biosciences, Zymeworks, Schrodinger Other Relationship (Inst.): GOG Partners

Steve Gruber sits down with Seena Saiedian, a panelist at the Free Iran Convention 2025 and J.D. candidate at the University of Virginia School of Law. Seena shares insights from his work advocating for freedom and democracy in Iran, his experiences as a Karsh-Dillard Scholar, editor on the Virginia Law Review, and Symposium Chair for the Federalist Society, and highlights what attendees can expect from this year's convention. The conversation explores the importance of civic engagement, international human rights, and the ongoing fight for liberty in Iran.

Relying solely on the central laboratory for urinalysis testing comes with the risk of losing patients to follow up. In this episode of Laborastories, hosted by Dr. Ian Lentnek from Siemens Healthineers, Dr. Nicholas Larkey, point-of-care (POC) medical director and assistant professor of pathology at the University of Virginia School of Medicine, discusses the advantages of POC testing for urinalysis and how to leverage it to increase workflow efficiency, generate faster results, and improve diagnostic accuracy. This is a paid advertisement for Laborastories' listeners brought to you by Siemens Healthineers. The views expressed do not necessarily represent ADLM's views, and their inclusion in this podcast is not an endorsement by Laborastories or ADLM. With special guest: Dr. Nicholas Larkey, point-of-care medical director and assistant professor of pathology at the University of Virginia School of Medicine Hosted by: Dr. Ian Lentnek, medical director, point of care diagnostics, Siemens Healthineers

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Mike has a conversation with Dayna Bowen Matthew, Dean of the George Washington University Law School, where she has led the law school since 2020. Prior to her time at GW, she was a Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law, the University of Colorado Law School, and the University of Kentucky College of Law, and she has served as a Senior Advisor to the Office of Civil Rights of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). She is a graduate of Harvard University (AB), the University of Virginia School of Law (JD), and the University of Colorado (PhD).Mike and Dean Matthew discuss the increase in law school applicants this cycle (7:42 and 18:11), advice for applying during a competitive cycle (12:16), how the large firm hiring process in law school has changed into something that "bears no resemblance" to how it worked for decades (5:11), how the public interest and government hiring process has changed as well (6:27), how AI could impact legal employment in the future (24:10), why she chose the law school where she attended (2:33), what she would do differently if she were applying today (3:36), how to assess law schools' varying "personalities" (13:22), the fungibility of a JD (16:45), advice for law students (18:53), and what it's like being a law school dean in 2025 (28:53).You can read more about Dean Matthew here. We discussed two additional podcast interviews in this episode: "How Law School Hiring Has Changed (Rapidly) & How That Impacts Admissions""Emmy-Winning News Anchor Elizabeth Vargas on Overcoming Professional Setbacks and Anxiety."Note: Due to an unexpected technical issue during recording, Mike's audio quality decreases from 7:35 onward. Apologies for any difficulties this may cause, and please note that we have a full transcript of the episode linked below.You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠. You can read a full transcript with timestamps here.

World Awareness Week:Jesse Rudy Jesse Rudy is Founder and CEO of Redeem International. An attorney by training, Jesse spent 12 years with International Justice Mission, leading teams in Sri Lanka, Uganda, and the Philippines, before serving on IJM's global leadership team in the United States. In February 2020, Jesse launched Redeem to protect the homes and land of the world's most vulnerable widows and orphans. Jesse graduated from John Brown University ('99) and the University of Virginia School of Law. He lives just outside of Washington, D.C., with his wife Amy and their three children.

“I'm boooored!” Sound familiar? Athena and Mims unpack why boredom isn't a problem to solve—it's a skill to practice. From resisting the quick-fix screen handoff to nudging kids toward self-directed play, they dive into how unfilled moments spark creativity, problem-solving, time management, and real conversation (yes, even about why they're “bored”). Expect candid mom-moments, basement-play nostalgia, and practical ways to leave white space in family life—without turning you into the cruise director of your house. What you'll hear:Why “I'm bored” doesn't have to become your emergency

World Awareness Week:Jesse RudyJesse Rudy is Founder and CEO of Redeem International. An attorney by training, Jesse spent 12 years with International Justice Mission, leading teams in Sri Lanka, Uganda, and the Philippines, before serving on IJM's global leadership team in the United States. In February 2020, Jesse launched Redeem to protect the homes and land of the world's most vulnerable widows and orphans. Jesse graduated from John Brown University ('99) and the University of Virginia School of Law. He lives just outside of Washington, D.C., with his wife Amy and their three children.

Vidcast:  https://www.instagram.com/p/DQdlztLFFi-/The hot flashes and night sweats of menopause create a miserable midlife for so many women.  Hormones do offer relief, but many women cannot take them.  Enter a new non-hormonal drug just approved by the FDA.This medication, elinzanetant to be marketed as Lynkuet by Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, and Nerre Therapeutics, is an oral neurokinin/tachykinin antagonist that normalizes thermal and sleep regulation.  A phase 3 multi-national study headed by researchers at the University of Virginia School of Medicine shows that 120 mg elinzanetant taken daily relieves both the frequency and intensity of hot flashes, improves sleep quality, and elevates moods. Improvement occurred for some study participants within the first week of therapy.Last year, the FDA approved another Bayer oral menopause drug fezolinetant, branded as Veozah. With one neurokinin receptor blocker, it reduces hot flashes only. This year's new entry is more powerful as it blocks two neurokinin receptors and affects not only thermoregulation, the hot flashes, but also sleep and mood.Since these drugs contain no estrogen, they lack the risks of blood clots, possible strokes, or exacerbation of certain hormone-dependent cancers including breast, uterine, and ovarian. Once readily available at your pharmacy, they provide safe, effective, and non-hormonal options for controlling bothersome menopausal symptoms.  Currently not approved for women with pre- or peri-menopausal symptoms, that approval should come soon,https://medicalxpress.com/news/2025-10-fda-nonhormonal-drug-ease-menopause.htmlhttps://newsroom.uvahealth.com/2025/09/16/drug-reduces-hot-flashes-by-73-trial-finds/#women #elinzanetant #Lynkuet #menopaue #hotflashes #nightsweats

A leading authority on China's economy and financial system, Leland is the co-founder and CEO of China Beige Book International.Leland is a frequent commentator on media outlets such as CNBC, Bloomberg TV & Radio, CNN, BNN, BBC, and FOX Business, and he has served as a guest host of two of the financial world's top morning news shows, CNBC Squawk Box and Bloomberg Surveillance. His work is featured regularly in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, TIME, New Yorker, The Atlantic, Forbes, Foreign Policy, The Hill, and South China Morning Post.Before co-founding China Beige Book in 2010, Leland was a capital markets attorney based out of New York and Hong Kong and worked on the deal team at a major investment bank. He holds a law degree from the University of Virginia School of Law, where he was Hardy C. Dillard fellow and editor-in-chief of the International Law Journal; a master's degree in Chinese History from Oxford University; a BA in European History from Washington & Lee University; and a graduate Chinese language fellowship from Tunghai University (Taiwan).Leland is an elected member of the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations and Economic Club of New York, an elected life member of the Council on Foreign Relations, a board member of the Global Interdependence Center, and a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Brent Scowcroft Center on International Security at the Atlantic Council. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A leading authority on China's economy and financial system, Leland is the co-founder and CEO of China Beige Book International.‍Leland is a frequent commentator on media outlets such as CNBC, Bloomberg TV & Radio, CNN, BNN, BBC, and FOX Business, and he has served as a guest host of two of the financial world's top morning news shows, CNBC Squawk Box and Bloomberg Surveillance. His work is featured regularly in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, TIME, New Yorker, The Atlantic, Forbes, Foreign Policy, The Hill, and South China Morning Post.Before co-founding China Beige Book in 2010, Leland was a capital markets attorney based out of New York and Hong Kong and worked on the deal team at a major investment bank. He holds a law degree from the University of Virginia School of Law, where he was Hardy C. Dillard fellow and editor-in-chief of the International Law Journal; a master's degree in Chinese History from Oxford University; a BA in European History from Washington & Lee University; and a graduate Chinese language fellowship from Tunghai University (Taiwan).Leland is an elected member of the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations and Economic Club of New York, an elected life member of the Council on Foreign Relations, a board member of the Global Interdependence Center, and a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Brent Scowcroft Center on International Security at the Atlantic Council. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Professors Ross E. Davies of George Mason University, Lucas A. Powe Jr. of the University of Texas and Sarah A. Seo of New York University discuss UVA Law professor G. Edward White's new book, “Robert H. Jackson: A Life in Judgment.” Professor Risa Goluboff moderated the panel and Dean Leslie Kendrick '06 introduced the event, which was sponsored by the Law School and co-sponsored by the Legal History Program. (Oct. 9, 2025, University of Virginia School of Law)

“Kindergarten skills, right? If you're a pain to be around, you can be the best clinically, but no one wants to hang out with you at 2 a.m. when that bleed comes in.”- Viknesh Kasthuri, MDIn this episode, host Marie Hamel and guest Viknesh Kasthuri, MD, a resident at the University of Virginia School of Medicine, discuss all your burning questions about the match process, including how to prepare and how to cope with the stress of the match process. Related resources:Read more about the IR Integrated Residency.Learn more about upcoming Meet and Greet opportunities.SIR thanks BD for its generous support of the Kinked Wire.Contact us with your ideas and questions, or read more about about interventional radiology in IR Quarterly magazine or SIR's Patient Center.(c) Society of Interventional Radiology. Senior Editorial Manager, Hope Racine, explains the work she does at SIR. Support the show

This week on Conflict Managed, we welcome back award-winning attorney Jessica Childress for her third appearance on the show. Join us as we discuss:  Leaving a toxic workplace on your own terms  Toxic vs. Illegal work environments Leaving with dignity Your multi-hyphenated identity impacts the world Conflict Managed is available wherever you listen to podcasts and on YouTube @ 3pconflictrestoration.   Jessica Childress is the author of Peace: Leaving a Toxic Workplace on Your Own Terms.  Ms. Childress has practiced employment law for over eleven years, representing organizations of all sizes and individuals in employment law matters.  She is the Managing Attorney of the Childress Firm PLLC, a boutique employment law firm, based in Washington, D.C.  Ms. Childress holds a Bachelor of Arts in Government and African American Studies from the University of Virginia and a Juris Doctor from the University of Virginia School of Law. Ms. Childress graduated Phi Beta Kappa and with High Distinction from the University of Virginia in 2007.  Prior to launching the Childress Firm PLLC, Ms. Childress served as an associate at two global law firms and as an attorney at the United States Department of Justice.   Ms. Childress has litigated retaliation, discrimination, sexual harassment, non-competition, trade secret, unfair labor practice, and whistleblower cases before various tribunals. She serves clients in general business transactions with employees and independent contractors. Ms. Childress drafts agreements such as employment agreements, consulting agreements, severance agreements, and confidentiality agreements.  She has been the recipient of several honors, including the National Bar Association's 2018 Young Lawyer of the Year Award, the Washington Bar Association's 2017-2018 Young Lawyer of the Year Award, the National Bar Association's 40 under 40 Best Advocates Award, the Kim Keenan Leadership & Advocacy Award, the Greater Washington Area Chapter of the National Bar Association's Rising Star Award, and recognition by the National Black Lawyers as one of the top 100 black attorneys. In 2022, Ms. Childress received the Women Owned Law organization's Woman Legal Entrepreneur of the Year Award. Ms. Childress has been named to the 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters) Rising Stars lists. In 2024, The Childress Firm PLLC was honored as a Top 100 Minority Business Enterprise by the Capital Region Minority Supplier Development Council.  Ms. Childress is a 2022 graduate of the Aspen Institute's Justice and Society program. Ms. Childress serves as a contributor for Arianna Huffington's international media outlet, Thrive Global. She has been featured in numerous publications, including Forbes, Essence, the Huffington Post, Success, and Entrepreneur.   https://thechildressfirm.com/ Conflict Managed is hosted by Merry Brown and produced by Third Party Workplace Conflict Restoration Services.  

Philip J. Cozzolino is an Associate Professor of Research in the Division of Perceptual Studies at the University of Virginia School of Medicine. Philip received his Ph.D. in Psychology from the University of Minnesota in 2006 and spent 17 years at the University of Essex in the United Kingdom prior to joining DOPS.Philip's research explores how individuals seek meaning in life, with a particular focus on the positive psychological consequences of death awareness. Inspired by evidence from DOPS-generated research into near-death experiences, Philip is responsible for a psychological model that links healthy and honest considerations of human mortality to increased well-being, heightened desires for self-direction, and more authentic living. His work has been covered in the ‘Huffington Post', ‘Psychology Today', ‘Scientific American', ‘BBC Radio 4' and has generated research from numerous psychologists around the world.At DOPS, Philip's initial focus will be on investigating – and elucidating processes related to – reports of past-life memories from children around the world.Research Interests:Near-death experiencesChildren reporting past-life memoriesPsychological consequences of mortality awarenessOut-of-body experienceshttps://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-studies/dops-staff/philip-cozzolino-phd/ https://www.pastliveshypnosis.co.uk/https://www.patreon.com/ourparanormalafterlifeMy book 'Verified Near Death Experiences' https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DXKRGDFP Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

For the government, sanctions and export controls are foreign policy tools. For businesses, they are legal minefields. Audi Syarief is a senior associate who helps clients navigate this high-stakes world of regulatory puzzles and enforcement actions. In this episode, Audi explains how sanctions work, the outsized role of ambiguity in his practice, and his approach to managing risk across diverse client situations. He discusses the collaborative nature of working with deal teams, solving complex sanctions puzzles that can make or break deals, and how lawyers help keep clients compliant while enforcement agencies watch closely. From panicked calls about accidental violations to negotiating licenses with government regulators, Audi works at the intersection of law and foreign policy. Audi is a graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law.This episode is hosted by Kyle McEntee.Mentioned in this episode:Learn more about Rutgers LawLearn more about Vermont LawAccess LawHub today!Learn more about Rutgers LawColorado LawLearn more about Colorado Law

Send me a Text Message!What if the tropes you love are actually holding your thriller back? In this episode, Charlene Wang reveals how she transformed the beloved campus novel into a feminist revenge thriller by strategically subverting genre expectations. And the results landed her a major book deal. You'll discover the counterintuitive truth about "wasted" drafts (spoiler: nothing is ever wasted), learn how to weaponize social media as a character psychology tool rather than just a plot device, and understand why the most compelling morally gray characters make us root for their goals while questioning their methods. If you're struggling to make your thriller feel fresh or your contemporary setting feel authentic, this conversation will fundamentally change how you approach revision and might just save you years of trial and error.Learn more about CharleneBio: Charlene Wang was born in Beijing and, after immigrating to the US when she was three, has lived in seven different cities from Los Angeles to Rockville to Biloxi. Graduating with a B.A. in English from Dartmouth College and a J.D. from University of Virginia School of Law, she worked as a litigator for six years before quitting to pursue her childhood dream of becoming an author. She now lives in Brooklyn, NY, with her fiancé and their dog Winky.Episodes I think you'll love...Agent Carleen Geisler Reads a Submission & Shares How Agents Evaluate Opening PagesWriting Your Opening Scene with Thomas MullenWriting Unique Openings to Grab Literary Agent Attention: Jason Powell AuthorGet the list of 125+ Literary Agents who rep Thriller, Mystery, Suspense, and Crime Fiction Study the Opening Paragraphs of the Top Authors Writing Thrillers Right Now

Many times over Charlie Kirk's life those that opposed the idea of anyone hearing his message would threaten disruption on College Campuses where Turning Point USA was attempting to hold an event. This would give the administrators just enough cover to pull the plug under concerns for ‘disruption.' As the movement grew that became less frequent and as the “Prove Me Wrong” events welcomed opposing viewpoints it had seemingly gone the way of the dodo. Well, it came back. This time it was the Turning Point USA chapter at Western Albemarle High School that became the focal point of the threat as they scheduled Victoria Cobb, President of the Family Foundation, to visit with them on October 1. At first, the school pulled the plug citing, that's right, concerns over ‘disruption.' Not that the TPUSA meeting was going to be disruptive, no. That the ‘counter protest' would be. It's a classic. Then, just a 30 hours before her talk was scheduled to have taken place, the school reversed it's position saying in a statement, “Following discussions with the student leader, and with agreement on expectations to ensure the event is orderly, respectful, and concludes within the lunch period, the principal has determined that the Turning Point USA chapter at Western Albemarle High School may host its guest speaker during a regular lunchtime meeting,”  Victoria Cobb visits with us to talk about the grander landscape of potential return of the ‘cancel culture'. Keep Up With The Daily Signal   Sign up for our email newsletters:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.dailysignal.com/email⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠     Subscribe to our other shows:    The Tony Kinnett Cast: ⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL2284199939⁠ The Signal Sitdown: ⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL2026390376⁠   Problematic Women:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL7765680741⁠   Victor Davis Hanson: ⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL9809784327⁠     Follow The Daily Signal:    X:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠https://x.com/intent/user?screen_name=DailySignal⁠ Instagram:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.instagram.com/thedailysignal/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Facebook:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.facebook.com/TheDailySignalNews/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Truth Social:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://truthsocial.com/@DailySignal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  YouTube:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/dailysignal?sub_confirmation=1⁠    Subscribe on your favorite podcast platform and never miss an episode. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Many times over Charlie Kirk's life those who opposed the idea of anyone hearing his message would threaten disruption on college campuses where Turning Point USA was attempting to hold an event. This would give the administrators just enough cover to pull the plug under concerns for ‘disruption.' As the movement grew that became less […]

America has a problem. There's a nursing shortage. And it's not for lack of hopeful nurses. There's not enough clinical space! The Mary Morton Parsons Clinical Simulation Learning Center (CSLC) at University of Virginia School of Nursing is helping to alleviate that bottleneck with simulations. They get to experience Rob Craig as their first difficult patient in a range of simulations. And: Veterans Affairs hospitals are one of the largest medical providers in the nation. And recently, Sheila Ward introduced Virginia veterans to African diasporic dance and drumming. Later in the show: Teresa Salgado and her colleagues found that tens of thousands of Virginians from Hampton Roads to Wise County live far away from pharmacies. Researchers are calling these places “pharmacy deserts.” Salgado and her colleagues hope that their findings will support policy makers in creating incentives to establish pharmacies in underserved areas.

Professor George Geis leads a mock class and demonstrates how cold-calling works with help from UVA Law students during orientation. The class covers the intricacies of contract law as shown by the Supreme Court of Virginia case Lucy v. Zehmer. (University of Virginia School of Law, Aug. 15, 2025)

University of Minnesota law professor Jill Hasday discusses her award-winning book “We the Men: How Forgetting Women's Struggles for Equality Perpetuates Inequality.” Professor Danielle Citron, co-director of the LawTech Center, introduced Hasday at the event. (University of Virginia School of Law, Sept. 8, 2025)

Professors Asaf Lubin of Indiana University, Martin S. Lederman of Georgetown University and Alan Rozenshtein of the University of Minnesota discuss Vice Dean Ashley Deeks' new book, “The Double Black Box: National Security, Artificial Intelligence, and the Struggle for Democratic Accountability.” Professor Danielle Citron moderated the panel and Dean Leslie Kendrick '06 introduced the event, which was sponsored by the Law School and co-sponsored by the LawTech Center. (University of Virginia School of Law, Sept. 4, 2025)

Professor Sarah Stewart Ware talks to students about preparing for law school classes and building skills for lawyering. She spoke as part of the Class of 2028 orientation. (University of Virginia School of Law, Aug. 15, 2025)

Amy Wax, professor of law at the University of Pennsylvania, talks to Timon about her cancellation, the state of academia, and western civilization.    Amy Wax is a tenured professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, where she has taught since 2001, holding the Robert Mundheim Professor of Law chair since 2007. A native of Troy, New York, she earned a B.S. summa cum laude in molecular biophysics and biochemistry from Yale in 1975, a Marshall Scholarship to Oxford, and an M.D. from Harvard Medical School in 1981, where she trained as a neurologist. She completed her J.D. from Columbia Law School in 1987, serving as an editor of the Columbia Law Review. Wax clerked for Judge Abner J. Mikva and argued 15 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court while working in the Office of the Solicitor General. She taught at the University of Virginia School of Law from 1994 to 2001. Her academic work focuses on social welfare law, family policy, and labor markets. In 2024, she was suspended from teaching for one year due to controversial statements, which she challenged in a lawsuit.   Learn more about Amy Wax's work: https://www.law.upenn.edu/faculty/awax/ https://www.thefire.org/cases/university-pennsylvania-following-controversial-commentary-amy-wax-faces-major-sanction-penn   ––––––   Follow American Reformer across Social Media: X / Twitter – https://www.twitter.com/amreformer Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/AmericanReformer/ YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@AmericanReformer Rumble – https://rumble.com/user/AmReformer Website – https://americanreformer.org/   Promote a vigorous Christian approach to the cultural challenges of our day, by donating to The American Reformer: https://americanreformer.org/donate/   Follow Us on Twitter: Josh Abbotoy – https://twitter.com/Byzness Timon Cline – https://twitter.com/tlloydcline   The American Reformer Podcast is  hosted by Josh Abbotoy and Timon Cline, recorded remotely in the United States, and edited by Jared Cummings.   Subscribe to our Podcast, "The American Reformer" Get our RSS Feed – https://americanreformerpodcast.podbean.com/ Apple Podcasts – https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-american-reformer-podcast/id1677193347 Spotify – https://open.spotify.com/show/1V2dH5vhfogPIv0X8ux9Gm?si=a19db9dc271c4ce5

The Wolf Greenfield Summer Program gives aspiring attorneys a firsthand look at life inside of a thriving law firm. Participants are assigned to a specific Wolf Greenfield practice group, but they are also exposed to multiple practices to offer a 360-degree view of the firm's diverse services. This year's program featured ten members. Seven of them joined us on this edition of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield: ●      Christina Gray: attends University of New Hampshire, Franklin Pierce School of Law●      Kaylah Birmingham: a PhD candidate at Weill Cornell Graduate School of Medical Sciences●      Leannah Schmitt: a PhD candidate at Harvard University ●      Fayth Wisehart: attends University of Virginia School of Law●      Kyle Evans: a PhD candidate at Harvard University●      Leah Cravitz: attends Boston College Law School●      Neha Krishna: a rising senior at the University of PennsylvaniaHere are a few highlights of their conversation: 01:54 - How the associates heard about Wolf Greenfield's Summer Program and what led each to apply04:08 - Technology specialist interns share surprising aspects of the experience 05:50 - Favorite projects and experiences 07:45 - How the program prepares participants for their legal careers 11:25 - Returning for a second year to the program, Neha shares how this year's experience differs from the previous year12:10 - Advice for future participants

On today's Top News in 10, we cover: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard revokes security clearance from 37 current and former officials. New information shows CBS illegal 60 Minutes editing during the Harris campaign may have been a habit. Loudoun County Public Schools in Virginia suspends students for complaining about the opposite sex in their changing rooms. Keep Up With The Daily Signal Sign up for our email newsletters:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.dailysignal.com/email⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠     Subscribe to our other shows:  The Tony Kinnett Cast: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://open.spotify.com/show/7AFk8xjiOOBEynVg3JiN6g⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  The Signal Sitdown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL2026390376⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠   Problematic Women:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL7765680741⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠   Victor Davis Hanson: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL9809784327⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠   Follow The Daily Signal:  X:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://x.com/intent/user?screen_name=DailySignal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.instagram.com/thedailysignal/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Facebook:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.facebook.com/TheDailySignalNews/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Truth Social:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://truthsocial.com/@DailySignal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  YouTube:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/dailysignal?sub_confirmation=1⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠    Subscribe on your favorite podcast platform and never miss an episode. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today's Top News in 10, we cover: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard revokes security clearance from 37 current and former officials. New information shows CBS's illegal 60 Minutes editing during the Harris campaign may have been a habit. Loudoun County Public Schools in Virginia suspends students for complaining about the opposite sex in […]

Assistant Dean for Admissions Natalie Blazer '08 talks about life lessons that new students will learn at UVA Law. She spoke as part of the Class of 2028 orientation, following an introduction by Dean Leslie Kendrick '06. (University of Virginia School of Law, Aug. 15, 2025)

What does it mean to ‘know' something, and what does it mean specifically when stated by a scientist? What is the role of debate in driving scientific progress, and how does progress get built on the bones of science that we later find to be incorrect?James C. Zimring is a professor of pathology and immunology at the School of Medicine at the University of Virginia and also an author. His latest books are What Science Is and How It Really Works and Partial Truths: How Fractions Distort Our Thinking.Greg and James discuss the complex nature of scientific thinking and the philosophical underpinnings of scientific practices. James emphasizes the discrepancies between the idealized version of science and its messy reality. They explore the critical distinction between phenomena and theoretical claims, the social constructs within scientific methodology, and the importance of understanding what it means when scientists claim to 'know' something.*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:What science is and isn't03:18: My goal here was really to try and provide non-scientists with, as you pointed out, a more realistic assessment of what science is and what it means when a scientist says they know something. Because the hyperbole around scientific claims, although exciting, right, has also destroyed a lot of scientific credibility. The best way to lose credibility is to make a claim that you cannot possibly live up to. And at the same time, science is epistemically distinct. When a scientist says they know something, it means something different than other knowledge claims in other areas of thought. I am not a scientific imperialist. It does not mean something better, but it really means something different. And the failure, I think, to make that distinction is very damaging to how we navigate the world.Science is not about being right14:14: Science is not about being right. Science is about getting closer and closer to rightness. But scientists, we try to kill theories. That is what we do.Science is messy and sloppy1:00:45: Science is messy and sloppy, and this is what it means when a scientist says they know something, and it is very different from when anyone else says they know something. But it is quite different from what, historically, we say it means.Why is common sense thinking toxic to scientific progress?23:48: Common sense thinking is toxic to scientific progress because things that are common sense are often wrong. I mean, they are really helpful if you are wandering around the savanna trying to survive as a nomadic human. But when you are in the laboratory studying science, those things that work so well on the savanna are categorically incorrect. Unlearning millions of years of evolution of cognitive psychology is part of what it is to be a scientist, as you point, learning that we do not observe causality, learning that there are these confounders, learning that common sense things that are obvious may not be, is a large part of the scientific enterprise. And that is where it differs from what you are talking about—normal everyday thinking, especially statistics and other things.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Thomas KuhnRichard FeynmanKarl PopperA. J. AyerWillard Van Orman QuineNational Institutes of HealthBerengar of ToursTransubstantiationCharles Sanders PeirceConfoundingPaul FeyerabendMichel FoucaultPeter MeijerGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at the University of Virginia School of MedicineLinkedIn ProfileGuest Work:Amazon Author PageWhat Science Is and How It Really WorksPartial Truths: How Fractions Distort Our ThinkingTransfusion Medicine and HemostasisGoogle Scholar PageResearchGate Page

Kashi Way '99, a judge for the U.S. Tax Court, welcomes new UVA Law students at orientation. Dean Leslie Kendrick '06 introduced Way. (University of Virginia School of Law, Aug. 15, 2025)

Please enjoy this encore of Word Notes. The flagship product of the controversial Israeli spyware vendor, the NSO Group, use for remotely hacking mobile devices, most notably iPhones, via zero-click exploits. CyberWire Glossary link: ⁠https://thecyberwire.com/glossary/pegasus⁠ Audio reference link:⁠“Cybersecurity beyond the Headlines: A Conversation with Journalist Nicole Perlroth⁠,” Kristen Eichensehr, and Nicole Perlroth, University of Virginia School of Law, YouTube, 14 February 2022

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, Anna Hicks-Jaco interviews Natalie Blazer, Assistant Dean for Admissions and Chief Admissions Officer at the University of Virginia School of Law, on the upcoming 2025-2026 admissions cycle, how applicants should be thinking about and taking into account relevant current events, and advice for prospective law students preparing to submit their applications. They discuss predictions for the 2025-26 cycle (1:56), rising LSAT and GPA medians (20:22, 27:45), changes they've made to their application this year (12:30), the new student loan cap (30:26), how admissions offices are considering applicants writing about politics and protest in the current political climate (4:18), how they evaluate applicants who have been unable to get a job after graduating from college (7:36), whether writing about AI is overdone (36:34), advice for the "Why UVA" essay (13:05), and much more. As a brief disclaimer, Dean Blazer speaks for herself and often for UVA Law in this episode; her opinions do not reflect those of all admissions officers.In addition to her work at UVA Law, Natalie has served as Director of J.D. Admissions at Georgetown University Law Center and was Associate Director of Admissions at Columbia Law School. She hosts the UVA Law podcast Admissible, which "offers insights into the world of law school admissions and a behind-the-scenes look at life as a law student through interviews with students, faculty, alumni and staff."We've interviewed Natalie twice for Status Check before, and though we weren't able to get to all of the questions that Redditors requested we ask, we answered many of them in these past episodes:An Insider Look at Admissions with UVA Law Dean Natalie Blazer (Reddit Q&A + Artificial Intelligence in Admissions)UVA Law Admissions Dean Natalie Blazer Dives Deep into Law School AdmissionsPlease note: At the time that we recorded this episode, we noted that August 2025 LSAT registrants were up 27% relative to August 2024 registrants but that that number would come down over the days of the test administration. Ultimately, August LSAT registrants landed at a 23.7% increase vs. last year.You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on ⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠. You can read a full transcript of this episode (with timestamps) here.

Please enjoy this encore of Word Notes. The flagship product of the controversial Israeli spyware vendor, the NSO Group, use for remotely hacking mobile devices, most notably iPhones, via zero-click exploits. CyberWire Glossary link: ⁠https://thecyberwire.com/glossary/pegasus⁠ Audio reference link:⁠“Cybersecurity beyond the Headlines: A Conversation with Journalist Nicole Perlroth⁠,” Kristen Eichensehr, and Nicole Perlroth, University of Virginia School of Law, YouTube, 14 February 2022 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Richard Primus of the University of Michigan Law School and John Harrison of the University of Virginia School of Law join to discuss Primus's new book The Oldest Constitutional Question: Enumeration and Federal Power, which challenges the prevailing understanding of congressional power and argues that Congress is not limited to its textually enumerated powers. Their conversation traces how this fundamental disagreement has shaped key moments in American constitutional history, from the Founding Era to the New Deal, and why the debate remains unsettled today.    Resources Richard Primus, The Oldest Constitutional Question: Enumeration and Federal Power (2025)  Richard Primus, “'The Essential Characteristic': Enumerated Powers and the Bank of the United States,” Michigan Law Review (2018)  John Harrison, “Enumerated Federal Power and the Necessary and Proper Clause (reviewingThe Origins of the Necessary and Proper Clause by Gary Lawson, Geoffrey P. Miller, Robert G. Natelson, Guy I. Seidman),” The University of Chicago Law Review (2011)  McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)  Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Support our important work. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate

The ACS welcomed two new medical directors in June—Thomas C. Tsai, MD, MPH, FACS, is the Medical Director for Health Policy Research and Margaret “Megan” C. Tracci, MD, JD, FACS, is the Medical Director for Surgeon Engagement. In this episode, Steven D. Wexner, MD, PhD(Hon), FACS, talks with Drs. Tsai and Tracci about their new roles, including their current projects and strategies to advance the profession.   Steven D. Wexner, MD, PhD(Hon), FACS, is a colorectal surgeon from the Cleveland Clinic in Florida Thomas C. Tsai, MD, MPH, FACS, is a minimally invasive gastrointestinal and bariatric surgeon at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston Margaret “Megan” C. Tracci, MD, JD, FACS, is an endovascular surgeon at the University of Virginia School of Medicine in Charlottesville Talk about the podcast on social media using the hashtag #HouseofSurgery

Professor Xiao Wang explains how UVA Law's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic works to admitted students at UVA Law's open house. (University of Virginia School of Law, March 21, 2025)

Professor Michael Livermore talks to admitted students about environmental law opportunities at UVA. (University of Virginia School of Law, March 21, 2025)

Professor Molly Bishop Shadel provides advice to law students on public speaking, including preparing for oral presentations, effective delivery and combating nervousness. (University of Virginia School of Law, March 18, 2025)

Professor Jennifer Givens, director of the Innocence Project at UVA Law, and students talk about how the clinic works. (University of Virginia School of Law, March 27, 2025)

Lawfare Senior Editor Alan Rozenshtein sits down with Ashley Deeks, the Class of 1948 Professor of Scholarly Research in Law at the University of Virginia School of Law, to discuss her new book, “The Double Black Box: National Security, Artificial Intelligence, and the Struggle for Democratic Accountability.” They talk about the core metaphor of the book: the idea that the use of artificial intelligence in the national security space creates a "double black box." The first box is the traditional secrecy surrounding national security activities, and the second, inner box is the inscrutable nature of AI systems themselves, whose decision-making processes can be opaque even to their creators.They also discuss how this double black box challenges traditional checks on executive power, including from Congress, the courts, and actors within the executive branch itself. They explore some of Deeks's proposals to pierce these boxes, the ongoing debate about whether AI can be coded to be more lawful than human decision-makers, and why the international regulation of national security AI is more likely to resemble the fraught world of cyber norms than the more structured regime of nuclear arms control.Mentioned in this episode:"National Security AI and the Hurdles to International Regulation" by Ashley Deeks on Lawfare"Frictionless Government and Foreign Relations" by Kristen Eichensehr and Ashley Deeks in the Virginia Law ReviewTo receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

UVA Law professor George S. Geis leads a mock class of admitted students through understanding the law of agency, including the cases Gordon v. Doty, Bushey v. United States and Grimsley v. Manning. (University of Virginia School of Law, March 21, 2025)

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes and Natalie Orpett, and University of Virginia School of Law professor Ashley Deeks, to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Bracing for Fallout.” In a surprise move, President Trump joined Israel's military campaign against Iran over the weekend, using a specialized U.S. ordinance to hit Iranian nuclear sites that were beyond Israel's early reach. It's unclear to what extent the attack set back Iran's nuclear ambitions, and debates continue to rage whether the president's actions were wise or legal. But it did trigger an Iranian response against U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf — action that was shortly followed by a tentative U.S.-backed ceasefire between Iran and Israel. What best explains the president's decision to join the military campaign? And what will the consequences be, both in the region and back home in the United States?“Destinations Unknown.” In a short, unexplained opinion in the matter of DHS v. DVD this past week, the Supreme Court stayed a lower court preliminary injunction that had barred the Trump administration from removing immigrants to third countries with minimal procedural protections against threats of torture and other mistreatment. But the exact ramifications of this holding are unclear, as the Justice Department has now returned to the Court asking for clarification as to whether its ruling also invalidates a later order applying the class-wide prohibition in the initial preliminary injunction to a specific group of individuals. What explains the Supreme Court's odd approach in this case? And what could its broader ramifications be for the Trump administration's immigration agenda?“‘Bove the Law.” A now-public internal Justice Department whistleblower report alleges that Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General—and current Third Circuit nominee—Emil Bove endorsed plans to disregard judicial orders that would have obstructed the removal of foreign nationals in directing the Department of Homeland Security that it did not need to return certain deportation flights already in the air after a judge directed as much from the bench. How serious a transgression has Bove committed if these allegations are true? And what impact will they have on his Third Circuit confirmation?In object lessons, forget day-of-the-week underpants (or pronghorn shirts)! Ben spurs on a need for more day-of-the-week monsters with the last weather report you'll ever need. Natalie is escaping, not just from reality but also from the heat, with her local bookstore, East City Bookshop. Scott shared the heartbreaking news that The Atlantic is stealing yet another Rational Security co-host emeritus as our beloved Quinta Jurecic begins her next crazy venture beneath the skies (Quinta, we miss you already!). And Ashley, channeling our bereavement at Quinta's departure, recommends Alone on the History Channel.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes and Natalie Orpett, and University of Virginia School of Law professor Ashley Deeks, to talk through the week's big national security news, including:“Bracing for Fallout.” In a surprise move, President Trump joined Israel's military campaign against Iran over the weekend, using a specialized U.S. ordinance to hit Iranian nuclear sites that were beyond Israel's early reach. It's unclear to what extent the attack set back Iran's nuclear ambitions, and debates continue to rage whether the president's actions were wise or legal. But it did trigger an Iranian response against U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf — action that was shortly followed by a tentative U.S.-backed ceasefire between Iran and Israel. What best explains the president's decision to join the military campaign? And what will the consequences be, both in the region and back home in the United States?“Destinations Unknown.” In a short, unexplained opinion in the matter of DHS v. DVD this past week, the Supreme Court stayed a lower court preliminary injunction that had barred the Trump administration from removing immigrants to third countries with minimal procedural protections against threats of torture and other mistreatment. But the exact ramifications of this holding are unclear, as the Justice Department has now returned to the Court asking for clarification as to whether its ruling also invalidates a later order applying the class-wide prohibition in the initial preliminary injunction to a specific group of individuals. What explains the Supreme Court's odd approach in this case? And what could its broader ramifications be for the Trump administration's immigration agenda?“‘Bove the Law.” A now-public internal Justice Department whistleblower report alleges that Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General—and current Third Circuit nominee—Emil Bove endorsed plans to disregard judicial orders that would have obstructed the removal of foreign nationals in directing the Department of Homeland Security that it did not need to return certain deportation flights already in the air after a judge directed as much from the bench. How serious a transgression has Bove committed if these allegations are true? And what impact will they have on his Third Circuit confirmation?In object lessons, forget day-of-the-week underpants (or pronghorn shirts)! Ben spurs on a need for more day-of-the-week monsters with the last weather report you'll ever need. Natalie is escaping, not just from reality but also from the heat, with her local bookstore, East City Bookshop. Scott shared the heartbreaking news that The Atlantic is stealing yet another Rational Security co-host emeritus as our beloved Quinta Jurecic begins her next crazy venture beneath the skies (Quinta, we miss you already!). And Ashley, channeling our bereavement at Quinta's departure, recommends Alone on the History Channel.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Brad Handler is an entrepreneur redefining the luxury travel industry. Brad began his post college career at American Management Systems and then Apple. Brad then went to law school and was an attorney at a top Silicon Valley law firm, and then at eBay as their first in-house counsel from 1997 to 2001. But he is best known for his innovation in the world of destination travel clubs. In 2002 Brad founded Exclusive Resorts with his brother Brent and served as the company’s CEO and chairman. Brad and Brent then created Inspirato, a vacation service which, under their leadership, provided personalized, high-end travel experiences. Brad and his brother left Inspirato in 2024 and Brad recently started Passport Golf which partners with leading country clubs to offer luxury once-in-a-lifetime golf excursions to New Zealand, Scotland, and Ireland. Brad earned a bachelor’s degrees from the University of Pennsylvania, and a JD from the University of Virginia School of Law.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

High School Senior Elliot Pomper shares his journey establishing "Fruitful", an initiative focused on recovering perfectly good fruit from the trays of students that they choose not to eat for any reason and donating it to a local food pantry.

Legal scholars Gillian Metzger of Columbia Law School and Saikrishna Prakash of the University of Virginia School of Law examine the founders' vision for the presidency, how presidential power has changed over time, and the key constitutional debates that have shaped the modern presidency. The discussion explores how the Trump presidency fits within this historical context and what it means for the future of presidential power. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Resources Federalist No. 70 Myers v. United States (1926) Trump v. United States (2024) Saikrishna Prakash, The Living Presidency: An Originalist Argument Against Its Ever-Expanding Powers, (2020) Saikrishna Prakash, Imperial from the Beginning: The Constitution of the Original Executive, (2015) Gillian Metzger, “Disqualification, Immunity, and the Presidency,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 138 (April 1, 2025) Michel Martin, “Political scientists alarmed by Trump's disregard for checks on the executive branch,” NPR (Feb. 3, 2025) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠⁠ Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. ⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠. Support our important work. ⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate⁠

Did you know improper patient nutrition can severely impact your patient's outcomes? Join the co-hosts as they welcome patient nutrition expert Beth Quatrara for an eye-opening and insightful conversation about patient nutrition. Also, Beth shares some powerful ideas regarding how med-surg nurses can optimize their own nutrition during long shifts and once they get home. (AMSN Members Earn 0.5 CE Hours*) * This episode is eligible for 0.5 contact hours for AMSN members who listen to the episode and submit a completed evaluation through the online library. None of the individuals with the ability to control the content of this episode have any relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies to disclose. The Academy of Medical Surgical Nurses is an accredited provider of nursing continuing professional development by the American Nurses Credentialing Center's Commission on Accreditation.   SPECIAL GUEST Beth Quatrara, DNP, RN, CMSRN, ACNS-BC is a doctorally-prepared Clinical Nurse Specialist with over 25 years of nursing experience. The majority of her clinical career has been focused on caring for patients with digestive health concerns and associated nutritional complexities. She serves as the AMSN Nutrition liaison; working with AMSN members to amplify the nutritional care of their patients. She presents nationally and publishes on nutrition-related topics, as well as a host of clinically related issues. Dr Quatrara is an Associate Professor, and currently serves as the Program Lead for the MSN and DNP Graduate Programs at the University of Virginia School of Nursing.   MEET OUR CO-HOSTS Samantha Bayne, MSN, RN, CMSRN, NPD-BC is a nursing professional development practitioner in the inland northwest specializing in medical-surgical nursing. The first four years of her practice were spent bedside on a busy ortho/neuro unit where she found her passion for newly graduated RNs, interdisciplinary collaboration, and professional governance. Sam is an unwavering advocate for medical-surgical nursing as a specialty and enjoys helping nurses prepare for specialty certification.    Kellye' McRae, MSN-Ed, RN is a dedicated Med-Surg Staff Nurse and Unit Based Educator based in South Georgia, with 12 years of invaluable nursing experience. She is passionate about mentoring new nurses, sharing her clinical wisdom to empower the next generation of nurses. Kellye' excels in bedside teaching, blending hands-on training with compassionate patient care to ensure both nurses and patients thrive. Her commitment to education and excellence makes her a cornerstone of her healthcare team.   Marcela Salcedo, RN, BSN is a Floatpool nightshift nurse in the Chicagoland area, specializing in step-down and medical-surgical care. A member of AMSN and the Hektoen Nurses, she combines her passion for nursing with the healing power of the arts and humanities. As a mother of four, Marcela is reigniting her passion for nursing by embracing the chaos of caregiving, fostering personal growth, and building meaningful connections that inspire her work.   Eric Torres, ADN, RN, CMSRN is a California native that has always dreamed of seeing the World, and when that didn't work out, he set his sights on nursing.  Eric is beyond excited to be joining the AMSN podcast and having a chance to share his stories and experiences of being a bedside medical-surgical nurse.   Maritess M. Quinto, DNP, RN, NPD-BC, CMSRN is a clinical educator currently leading a team of educators who is passionately helping healthcare colleagues, especially newly graduate nurses. She was born and raised in the Philippines and immigrated to the United States with her family in Florida. Her family of seven (three girls and two boys with her husband who is also a Registered Nurse) loves to travel, especially to Disney World. She loves to share her experiences about parenting, travelling, and, of course, nursing!   Sydney Wall, RN, BSN, CMSRN has been a med surg nurse for 5 years. After graduating from the University of Rhode Island in 2019, Sydney commissioned into the Navy and began her nursing career working on a cardiac/telemetry unit in Bethesda, Maryland.  Currently she is stationed overseas, providing care for service members and their families.  During her free time, she enjoys martial arts and traveling.   

Gillian Metzger of Columbia Law School and Saikrishna Prakash of the University of Virginia School of Law join Jeffrey Rosen to examine the founders' vision for the presidency, review how presidential power has changed over time, and debate the constitutional questions—including the unitary executive theory—that have shaped the modern presidency. Resources Federalist No. 70, New York Packet (March 18, 1788) Myers v. United States (1926) Trump v. United States (2024) Saikrishna Prakash, The Living Presidency: An Originalist Argument Against Its Ever-Expanding Powers, (2020) Saikrishna Prakash, Imperial from the Beginning: The Constitution of the Original Executive, (2015) Gillian Metzger, “Disqualification, Immunity, and the Presidency,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 138 (April 1, 2025) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠ Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. ⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠live program⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠. Support our important work. ⁠⁠Donate

SummaryWhat if disagreement could actually unite us? Judge Thomas Griffith, former DC Circuit Court judge, joins us to explore the Constitution's genius: its embrace of disagreement as a path to the common good. Judge Griffith shares personal stories from his judicial career, including his bipartisan support for Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, and dispels the myth of “partisans in robes.” He challenges listeners to defend the Constitution through humility, compromise, and local action, and offers hope for those discouraged by political division.About Our GuestJudge Thomas B. Griffith was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by President George W. Bush in 2005, and served until his retirement in 2020. He is currently a Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School, a Fellow at the Wheatley Institute, and Special Counsel at Hunton Andrews Kurth. He is also engaged in rule of law initiatives in Central and Eastern Europe. Earlier in his career, Judge Griffith served as General Counsel of Brigham Young University and as Senate Legal Counsel, the nonpartisan chief legal officer of the U.S. Senate. In 2021, President Biden appointed him to the President's Commission on the Supreme Court. He is also a co-author of Lost, Not Stolen: The Conservative Case that Biden Won and Trump Lost the 2020 Presidential Election. He holds a BA from Brigham Young University and a JD from the University of Virginia School of Law.Useful LinksJudge Griffith's Wikipedia entry:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_B._GriffithBraver Angels – Bridging Political Divides Through Civil Discourse:https://braverangels.orgJudge Griffith's Letter in Support of Justice Jackson: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2.26.22%20-%20Judge%20Thomas%20Griffith%20Support%20for%20Jackson.pdfJudge Griffith's 2012 Speech at BYU, "The Hard Work of Understanding the Constitution": https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/thomas-b-griffith/the-hard-work-of-understanding-the-constitution/ Pleasant Pictures MusicJoin the Pleasant Pictures Music Club to get unlimited access to high-quality, royalty-free music for all of your projects. Use the discount code HOWTOHELP15 for 15% off your first year.

On May 15, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case challenging the constitutionality of President Trump's executive order which seeks to end birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants. Legal scholars Gabriel Chin of the University of California, Davis School of Law; Amanda Frost of the University of Virginia School of Law; Kurt Lash of the University of Richmond School of Law; and Ilan Wurman of the University of Minnesota Law School join Jeffrey Rosen to debate the scope of the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.   Resources Gabriel J. Chin and Paul Finkelman, “Birthright Citizenship, Slave Trade Legislation, and the Origins of Federal Immigration Regulation,” UC Davis Law Review (April 8, 2021)  Ilan Wurman, “Jurisdiction and Citizenship,” Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No.25-27 (April 14, 2025)  Amanda Frost, “The Coming Assault on Birthright Citizenship,” The Atlantic (Jan. 7 2025)  Kurt Lash, “Prima Facie Citizenship: Birth, Allegiance and the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause,” SSRN (Feb. 22, 2025)  Amanda Frost, Testimony Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government, U.S. House of Representatives (Feb. 25, 2025)  Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate