Podcast appearances and mentions of wen fa

Is it Constitutional to ask people to pay for reparations of others based on skin color? Wen Fa of the Pacific Legal Foundation joins Michele to discuss.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Is it Constitutional to ask people to pay for reparations of others based on skin color? Wen Fa of the Pacific Legal Foundation joins Michele to discuss.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the name of equality, some state and local governments seem to have implemented race-and-gender-based legal quotas in practice if not in name. Wen Fa, an attorney who represents plaintiffs challenging the legality of these laws and policies provides a litigation update on two of his latest cases: CFER v. Alameda County, and Raak Law v. Gast.In CFER v. Alameda County, plaintiffs are Oakland-area taxpayers who allege that county set-asides for Minority Business Enterprises violate federal and California constitutional prohibitions on racial discrimination.Meanwhile, in Raak Law v. Gast, the plaintiffs are prospective candidates for the Iowa Judicial Nominating Commission. They contend Iowa law establishes a gender quota by staggering the two commissioners' elections and requiring that of the two commissioners from each district, one be female and the other be male.Listen for a Litigation Update on these two fascinating cases, as Wen Fa reviews the facts and law of these cases, as well as the status of each case.Featuring:Wen Fa, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation[Moderator] Dan Morenhoff, Executive Director, Equal Voting Rights InstituteVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

In many contexts, some policy entrepreneurs have replaced the near-universal value of equality before the law with a far more nebulous "equity." Wen Fa, attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation, explains the distinction and its implications. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Faced with a limited supply of recently-approved COVID-19 treatments, both the State and City of New York have issued directives instructing physicians and providers on how to prioritize treatment. One of the factors to be considered is race. In Roberts v. Bassett, two lifelong New Yorkers challenge the government's race-based allocation of potentially lifesaving COVID-19 treatments. Wen Fa, an attorney who represents the plaintiffs, joined us to discuss the latest in the case.Featuring:- Wen Fa, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Wen Fa of the Pacific Legal Foundation is one of the attorneys on the case. Wen joins Wiggins to explain.

Dom Giordano, WPHT host and former teacher, has dedicated much of his daily show toward parents who are taking it into their own hands to push back against school boards that have a negative impact on their children. This has culminated in a weekly podcast on education, Readin', Writin', and Reason, which has allowed wonderful relationships to develop between Giordano, educators, and parents throughout the country who are speaking out against overbearing school boards. First, Giordano welcomes back Wen Fa, an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation and an expert on the discrimination that Asian-Americans face in the university admissions process, to discuss the Supreme Court cases involving Harvard and UNC determining whether or not the process is unfair. First, Giordano asks for some clarification on terms used in the lawsuit and reporting that aren't in the common lexicon, asking about the term ‘decile' and how it applies to the lawsuit. Wen provides a contextual history to the lawsuit, telling of past Supreme Court decisions concerning affirmative action, which is largely at stake in the argument. Then, Todd Shepherd, investigative journalist for Broad and Liberty, joins the Dom Giordano Program to discuss the story centered around former St. Joe's professor Gregory Manco who was released from St. Joes after allegedly racist social media posts. First, Shepherd reveals details he's unearthed about the accuser who first brought the anonymous tweets to university officials, explaining that there looks to be a long-term grudge held against the professor by the student whistleblower due to a bad grade that the student received. In the Broad and Liberty story, Shepherd revealed that Manco has now filed a federal lawsuit against the university and the former student over free speech, alleging defamation, civil conspiracy, and other charges. Shepherd tells what he believes is at stake in the lawsuit, and tells what will have to happen for Gregory Manco to win the lawsuit. And attorney Michael Taylor joins the Dom Giordano Program to discuss a situation playing out in the Downingtown Area School District featuring an election dispute. During the recent election, Margie Miller won a seat on the school board by a four vote margin. This past week, a lawyer for her competition disputed the election results, arguing that six ballots that have been disputed should win the competitor the election. Taylor takes us through the situation, telling the results of the election, and Giordano frames the situation in a larger scope, telling of the implications a decision on this election would have on mail-in ballots in elections state-wide.

Guests: Jonathan Keller, Wen Fa, Dawn Damon and Brian Johnston See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Giordano welcomes back Wen Fa, an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation and an expert on the discrimination that Asian-Americans face in the university admissions process, to discuss the Supreme Court cases involving Harvard and UNC determining whether or not the process is unfair. First, Giordano asks for some clarification on terms used in the lawsuit and reporting that aren't in the common lexicon, asking about the term ‘decile' and how it applies to the lawsuit. Wen provides a contextual history to the lawsuit, telling of past Supreme Court decisions concerning affirmative action, which is largely at stake in the argument. (Photo by Getty Images)

Full Hour | To lead off the second hour, FreedomWorks Chief Economist Stephen Moore rejoins the Dom Giordano Program for an in-depth analysis of the rollercoaster ride we have seen in the stock market the past two days. First, Giordano asks whether or not this is the end of the 10-year stock market surge we've seen, with Moore explaining that while he would be cautious, he does not think this would be the end. In addition, Giordano and Moore discuss Biden's effort to become the next LBJ and the result that his policies have had on inflation, and the damage that the Build Back Better bill would inflict on Americans. Then, Giordano welcomes back Wen Fa, an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation and an expert on the discrimination that Asian-Americans face in the university admissions process, to discuss the Supreme Court cases involving Harvard and UNC determining whether or not the process is unfair. First, Giordano asks for some clarification on terms used in the lawsuit and reporting that aren't in the common lexicon, asking about the term ‘decile' and how it applies to the lawsuit. Wen provides a contextual history to the lawsuit, telling of past Supreme Court decisions concerning affirmative action, which is largely at stake in the argument. (Photo by Getty Images)

On this episode of At The Bar, Inez Stepman and Jennifer C. Braceras discuss the legality of dispensing medical treatment on the basis of race. Wen Fa from the Pacific Legal Foundation and Aaron Sibarium from the Washington Free Beacon join the conversation.--Hosted by Inez Stepman of Independent Women's Forum and Jennifer Braceras of Independent Women's Law Center, At The Bar is a virtual happy hour conversation about issues at the intersection of law, politics, and culture.You can find the latest At The Bar episodes wherever you get your podcasts, on YouTube, or on iwf.org. Then subscribe, rate, and share with your friends.Independent Women's Forum (IWF) believes all issues are women's issues. IWF promotes policies that aren't just well-intended, but actually enhance people's freedoms, opportunities, and choices. IWF doesn't just talk about problems. We identify solutions and take them straight to the playmakers and policy creators. And, as a 501(c)3, IWF educates the public about the most important topics of the day.Independent Women's Law Center advocates for equal opportunity, individual liberty, and respect for the American constitutional order.Check out our website for more information on how policies impact you, your loved ones, and your community: www.iwf.org.Subscribe to IWF's YouTube channel.Follow IWF on social media: - on Twitter- on Facebook- on Instagram#IWLC #AtTheBar #IWlaw #IWF Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On June 23rd, 2021 the Supreme Court decided Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, a case which concerned whether a California regulation granting labor organizations a “right to take access” to an agricultural employer's property to solicit support for unionization constitutes a per se physical taking under the Fifth Amendment. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the 6-3 majority opinion of the Court, holding that California's access regulation constitutes a per se physical taking. Joining me today to discuss this decision in Wen Fa, attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation.

In this episode Dan and Pat welcome back Wen Fa of the Pacific Legal Foundation to discuss the SCOTUS decision in Cedar Point v. Hassid. We discussed the oral argument in this case on Episode 18 of the show and we thank Wen for coming back to discuss the decision. The decision is linked here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-107_ihdj.pdf --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

The Supreme Court issued its decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid on June 23, 2021, holding 6-3 that a California regulation allowing California union organizers entry onto the private property of California growers constituted an uncompensated per se physical taking in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Ninth Circuit's decision upholding the regulation was reversed and the case was remanded.In this episode, attorney Wen Fa analyzes the decision and its implications.Featuring:- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

In this episode, Charles talks to Carol Roth, author of The War on Small Business. The discuss the government's reaction to the Covid crisis and how it was hostile to small businesses while propping up major corporations. Next, Charles is joined by Wen Fa, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation. Wen discusses a case where an IL farmer was denied Covid relief because he's white. Finally, Amity Shlaes discusses the Citizenship Challenge the Coolidge Foundation is doing with Seeking educational Excellence. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dom Giordano, WPHT host and former teacher, has dedicated much of his daily show toward parents who are taking it into their own hands to push back against school boards that have a negative impact on their children. This has culminated in a weekly podcast on education, Readin', Writin', and Reason, which has allowed wonderful relationships to develop between Giordano, educators, and parents throughout the country who are speaking out against overbearing school boards. This week, Dom is first joined by Kaitlin Derstine, founder of 'Soudy Strong Conservatives,' a group for conservatives in the Souderton Area School District who stand with the Souderton School Board in preserving the traditional educational model that raises proud Americans. 'Soudy Strong Conservatives' support full-time in-person education and stand against radical ideology such as The 1619 Project, Critical Race Theory, and Comprehensive Sexuality Education. Then, Giordano is joined by Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Wen Fa for an update on a Supreme Court case including Harvard University's discrimination in admissions for Asian-American students.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Pacific Legal Foundation Attorney, Wen Fa discusses a farm loan forgiveness provision baked into the COVID-19-driven American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, allows loan forgiveness of up to 120 percent but only for minority farmers and ranchers, who the law automatically treats as “socially disadvantaged,” regardless of their individual circumstances. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Pacific Legal Foundation Attorney, Wen Fa discusses a farm loan forgiveness provision baked into the COVID-19-driven American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, allows loan forgiveness of up to 120 percent but only for minority farmers and ranchers, who the law automatically treats as “socially disadvantaged,” regardless of their individual circumstances. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On March 22, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid. The question before the Court was whether the uncompensated appropriation of an easement that is limited in time effects a per se physical taking under the Fifth Amendment.Wen Fa, attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation, joins us today to discuss this case's oral argument.

On Episode 18 of the Podium and Panel Podcast and Dan and I are joined by Wen Fa of the Pacific Legal Foundation to discuss Cedar Point v. Hassid argued this week before the Supreme Court of the United States by one of his colleagues. The link to the Federalist Society teleforum is here: https://fedsoc.org/events/courthouse-steps-oral-argument-cedar-point-nursery-v-hassid The oral argument before SCOTUS is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2020/20-107 --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Jeff Crouere is the host of, “Ringside Politics,” which airs weekdays on WGSO 990-AM in New Orleans. He is a political columnist, the author of America's Last Chance and provides regular commentaries on the Jeff Crouere YouTube channel and on www.JeffCrouere.com. TOPIC: FUTURE OF GOP WILL BE DETERMINED BY TRUMP TRIAL!! Wen Fa is an attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation’s national headquarters. He has litigated numerous direct-rep cases dealing with private property, equality under the law, school choice, economic liberty, and the First Amendment. Wen has appeared on radio over a dozen times. He has published a scholarly article in the William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal and shorter pieces in newspapers and PLF’s blog. Wen is the founder of the Sacramento Chapter of America’s Future Foundation, and a board member of the Sacramento Lawyers Chapter of the Federalist Society. TOPIC: Was 2020 a turning point for identity politics?

Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Wen Fa discusses the ongoing lawsuit against Harvard University (and similar legal actions against other universities) that target specific minority groups for increased and limited admission. Fa specifically addresses Harvard's policies regarding Asian-American applicants and compares those to treatments of applicants of other races. The discussion looks at the larger picture of race and merit-based admissions.

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government is waiving affirmative action requirements in federal construction projects. Wen Fa discusses whether state and local regulations should follow suit. Featuring:- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government is waiving affirmative action requirements in federal construction projects. Wen Fa discusses whether state and local regulations should follow suit. Featuring:- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Nan Su, news commentator for SOH International Chinese Radio Network and NTD International TV network, and has made many speeches at public events in the past decade on China-related topics. Mr. Su currently is a Senior Reporter for The Epoch Times, a newspaper published in 35 countries and 23 languages. In addition to his media work, Mr. Su has also been an activist for China’s human rights. He was one of the coordinators of Human Rights Torch Relay in 2008 prior to Beijing Olympics Game. Starting from Athens, Human Rights Torch Relay spanned from July 2007 to July 2008, with stops at more than 140 cities around the world in order to raise international awareness of China’s human rights situation. TOPIC..Did China’s Plan to Destroy the United States Backfire??!! Anne Schlafly Cori is Chairman of Eagle Forum and has served on Eagle Forum boards of directors since 2008. From 2012-16, Anne Cori was the regular guest host for “Eagle Forum Live”, a weekly radio show on the Bott Radio Network, and she hosted fifty programs. She has emceed several Eagle Forum events over the years, including Eagle Council and Collegians. Anne is the daughter of Phyllis Schlafly. She and her husband, Tom Cori, have hosted many candidate fundraisers in their home. TOPIC...Hulu and FX's nine-part series bashes conservative Phyllis Schlafly!! Wen Fa is an attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation’s national headquarters. He has litigated numerous direct-rep cases dealing with private property, equality under the law, school choice, economic liberty, and the First Amendment. Wen’s clients include Edmund, a black fourth-grade boy who wants the chance to attend the same schools as his white neighbors; Adam, a fifth-generation business owner who wants to sell his artisanal butter to Wisconsin consumers; and Andy, a voter who wants to wear a shirt with the words “don’t tread on me” when he votes. Wen has appeared on radio over a dozen times. TOPIC... New lawsuit challenges California’s egregious censorship of license plates!!

In Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard, it is alleged that Harvard admissions discriminated against Asian applicants. In this episode, Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Wen Fa discusses the case, the legal context in which the case was brought, and the case's potential implications.Featuring:- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

In Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard, it is alleged that Harvard admissions discriminated against Asian applicants. In this episode, Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Wen Fa discusses the case, the legal context in which the case was brought, and the case's potential implications.Featuring:- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Wen Fa is an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, a national, nonprofit legal organization that represents clients free of charge. We talked about his work on cases including Rentberry v. City of Seattle about rent-bidding laws, and another tenant/landlord case, Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco, and various cases about Vaping. ***** … Continue reading "CO125 Wen Fa on Litigating Liberty"

Wen Fa is an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, a national, nonprofit legal organization that represents clients free of charge. We talked about his work on cases including Rentberry v. City of Seattle about rent-bidding laws, and another tenant/landlord case, Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco, and various cases about Vaping. ***** … Continue reading "CO125 Wen Fa on Litigating Liberty"

Jon Kotler, a California fan of the London soccer club Fulham FC, wanted to put the letters "COYW" on his license plate. The letters stand for a common phrase that Fulham fans use to support their team: "Come on You Whites!" "White" is meant to refer to the color of Fulham's home kits, but the DMV deemed the acroynym offensive and prevented Kotler from using it.Kotler filed a federal suit claiming that the DMV had violated his free speech rights. In this short episode, Wen Fa, an attorney in the case, describes the details.Featuring:- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Jon Kotler, a California fan of the London soccer club Fulham FC, wanted to put the letters "COYW" on his license plate. The letters stand for a common phrase that Fulham fans use to support their team: "Come on You Whites!" "White" is meant to refer to the color of Fulham's home kits, but the DMV deemed the acroynym offensive and prevented Kotler from using it.Kotler filed a federal suit claiming that the DMV had violated his free speech rights. In this short episode, Wen Fa, an attorney in the case, describes the details.Featuring:- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On May 8, 2019, the Ninth Circuit issued a 2-1 decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Shiroma. In Cedar Point, California agricultural growers asked the court to invalidate an Agricultural Labor Relations Board regulation that allowed union organizers to come on to the growers’ property to solicit workers to join the union for 3 hours per day and 120 days per year. The growers contend that the regulation amounts to a physical taking under the Fifth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit majority rejected that argument, and held that the physical takings doctrine did not apply because the union organizers were not allowed around-the-clock access to the growers’ property.In this podcast, hear reactions from Wen Fa and Bethany Berger.Featuring:- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation- Prof. Bethany Berger, Wallace Stevens Professor of Law, University of Connecticut School of LawVisit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On May 8, 2019, the Ninth Circuit issued a 2-1 decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Shiroma. In Cedar Point, California agricultural growers asked the court to invalidate an Agricultural Labor Relations Board regulation that allowed union organizers to come on to the growers’ property to solicit workers to join the union for 3 hours per day and 120 days per year. The growers contend that the regulation amounts to a physical taking under the Fifth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit majority rejected that argument, and held that the physical takings doctrine did not apply because the union organizers were not allowed around-the-clock access to the growers’ property.In this podcast, hear reactions from Wen Fa and Bethany Berger.Featuring:- Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation- Prof. Bethany Berger, Wallace Stevens Professor of Law, University of Connecticut School of LawVisit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On May 8, 2019, the Ninth Circuit issued a 2-1 decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Shiroma. In Cedar Point, California agricultural growers asked the court to invalidate an Agricultural Labor Relations Board regulation that allowed union organizers to come on to the growers’ property to solicit workers to join the union for 3 hours per day and 120 days per year. The growers contend that the regulation amounts to a physical taking under the Fifth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit majority rejected that argument, and held that the physical takings doctrine did not apply because the union organizers were not allowed around-the-clock access to the growers’ property. The dissent would have held for the growers, and reasoned that the Supreme Court has never endorsed a law that allowed non-employee labor organizers to enter a grower’s private property for substantial periods of time, when none of the employees live on the employer’s premises.Join the teleforum to hear reactions from Wen Fa and Bethany Berger. Wen Fa is an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to vindicating property rights and individual liberty. Mr. Fa was the primary drafter of the Growers’ Ninth Circuit brief and argued the case before the Ninth Circuit panel. Bethany Berger is a law professor at the University of Connecticut and an expert on property law.Featuring: Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationProf. Bethany Berger, Wallace Stevens Professor of Law, University of Connecticut School of Law Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

On May 8, 2019, the Ninth Circuit issued a 2-1 decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Shiroma. In Cedar Point, California agricultural growers asked the court to invalidate an Agricultural Labor Relations Board regulation that allowed union organizers to come on to the growers’ property to solicit workers to join the union for 3 hours per day and 120 days per year. The growers contend that the regulation amounts to a physical taking under the Fifth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit majority rejected that argument, and held that the physical takings doctrine did not apply because the union organizers were not allowed around-the-clock access to the growers’ property. The dissent would have held for the growers, and reasoned that the Supreme Court has never endorsed a law that allowed non-employee labor organizers to enter a grower’s private property for substantial periods of time, when none of the employees live on the employer’s premises.Join the teleforum to hear reactions from Wen Fa and Bethany Berger. Wen Fa is an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to vindicating property rights and individual liberty. Mr. Fa was the primary drafter of the Growers’ Ninth Circuit brief and argued the case before the Ninth Circuit panel. Bethany Berger is a law professor at the University of Connecticut and an expert on property law.Featuring: Wen Fa, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationProf. Bethany Berger, Wallace Stevens Professor of Law, University of Connecticut School of Law Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

On today’s episode of So to Speak: The Free Speech Podcast, we are joined by Wen Fa, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation who regularly litigates free speech cases. One of his most high-profile cases was the 2018 Supreme Court case Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, dealing with a polling-place dress code in Minnesota. Show notes: Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky Ostrewich v. Trautman Kotler v. Webb www.sotospeakpodcast.com Follow us on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/freespeechtalk Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sotospeakpodcast Email us: sotospeak@thefire.org

Kruser talks with Wen Fa with the Pacific Legal Foundation. He's part of the legal team arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court in a case involving being able to wear politically themed clothing or accessories to polls on election day.

Can the state ban you from wearing any political message at the polling place? Wen Fa is an attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation. We discussed his case before the Supreme Court, Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Sue is joined by Dan McGrath and Wen Fa to discuss their Supreme Court case.

Sue is joined by Dan McGrath and Wen Fa to discuss their Supreme Court case.

The Supreme Court announced that it will hear a First Amendment challenge to Minnesota’s sweeping, speech-stifling restrictions on what can be worn while voting. Represented free of charge by Pacific Legal Foundation, concerned residents like Andy Cilek are targeting the state’s unconstitutional prohibition on wearing anything to the polls that might be interpreted as even slightly ideological, even if it has no relation to any candidate, ballot measure, or political party. The case challenges a Minnesota law that forbids voters from wearing any “political badge, political button, or other political insignia.” Officials have interpreted this open-ended language to cover messages that merely express a general social or philosophical outlook. As the government itself noted at oral argument, Minnesota’s broad political apparel ban encompasses any shirt with the logo of the Chamber of Commerce or the AFL-CIO. In this week's episode of PLF's Courting Liberty podcast, hear from case attorney Wen Fa and client Andy Cilek as they break down the importance and gravity of their fight for free speech.