Podcasts about Yale Law School

We've all seen them. Endless Terms and Conditions followed by a click-box. Pages of Terms and Conditions whenever you sign a contract with a large company for services, loans, or just employment.  Often the T's and C's are illegal or unenforceable, yet you feel you need to sign them. Are you now at the mercy of the large entity because you've signed up to onerous terms?  Things are getting out of hand. We need a Rational View to get to the bottom of this problem. Daniel Wilf-Townsend is an Associate Professor of Law at Georgetown Law. His research focuses on the regulation of markets and technology, and in particular on the processes that legal institutions use to move the law from being words on paper to having actual consequences in everyday life. He teaches and writes on artificial intelligence, consumer protection, and civil litigation, and his work has appeared in the Harvard Law Review, Virginia Law Review, Yale Law Journal Forum, Stanford Law Review Online, and other legal and general interest publications. A graduate of Yale Law School, before entering academia Professor Wilf-Townsend was a litigator at Gupta Wessler PLLC, a boutique law firm focused on public interest litigation in appellate courts and the Supreme Court.  Follow me on YouTube Make your voice heard with The Rational View on Facebook!

On June 18, the Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law that prohibits medical transitions for transgender minors. In this episode, William Eskridge Jr. of Yale Law School and Christopher Green of The Ohio State University join to debate the decision and to discuss the meaning of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.    Resources United States v. Skrmetti (2025) Christopher Green, Brief amicus curiae, United States v. Skrmetti (Oct. 15, 2024) William Eskridge, et al., Brief amici curiae, United States v. Skrmetti (Sept. 3, 2024) Geduldig v. Aiello (1974)  Bostock v. Clayton County (2020)  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

Re-airing our most downloaded episode from our Vanishing Father's Series“To be a father was my way of breaking a cycle and starting over.” In this one sentence, today's guest, Peter Gronvall, insightfully reflects on his journey to fatherhood after growing up in a cult.- During his conversation with host Jamie Truman, Peter discusses his experience living in two distinct worlds: One world where he and his eight siblings were subjected to severe emotional and physical abuse, and another where he was a dedicated student and spent time with friends. He shares how he and his siblings persevered through these painful years, and the impact on his relationship with his parents.-Remarkably, Peter didn't let his experience derail his aspirations. He earned a full scholarship to college and then got accepted into Yale Law School, all the while being a source of support to his siblings. Most importantly, he became the type of father he always wanted: nurturing, empathetic, and protective.-Tune in to learn more about Peter Gronvall and how he survived growing up in a cult.-Purchase Vanishing Fathers 100% of the proceeds go to charity that help at-risk youthsConnect with Jamie at Truman Charities:FacebookInstagramLinkedInWebsiteYouTubeEmail: info@trumancharities.comThis episode was post produced by Podcast Boutique https://podcastboutique.com/

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

Acabou de sair mais um ep. da temporada Orgulho LGBTQIAPN+ na carreira!

Emily Bazelon, staff writer for The New York Times Magazine, co-host of Slate's "Political Gabfest" podcast, Truman Capote fellow for creative writing and law at Yale Law School and author of Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration (Random House, 2019), discusses the latest news coming out of the Supreme Court, including President Donald Trump's legal battle for control of the California National Guard and more.

Is your parenting stress spilling over into your child's life? You're not alone—and you're not powerless. In this episode, Mark Gerson, author of God Was Right, shares how biblical wisdom—paired with modern psychology—can radically shift the way we understand independence, fear, and success in parenting. We cover: The connection between parental stress and children's anxiety How ancient stories like Isaac's birth and Joseph's rise can transform your parenting style The myth of “stranger danger” and how it fuels fear-based parenting Why celebrating your child's independence can relieve your stress How trusting God's plan reduces anxiety and promotes joyful parenting Mark helps us reframe stress, fear, and control through a lens of faith, confidence, and wisdom—so we can raise kids who thrive, not just survive.

Yale Law School graduate and bestselling author Mary Marantz shares her new book, Underestimated: The Surprisingly Simple Shift to Quit Playing Small, Name the Fear, and Move Forward Anyway. The book describes practical steps to achieving greatness and pushing past the lies fear creates.  Mary discusses her upbringing and her father's emphasis on the importance of education. She explains how she stopped overthinking and overcame her self-doubt, which led her to find success and her true calling.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

President Trump has never been shy about his revolutionary ambitions. In his second term, he's moved aggressively to consolidate power within the executive branch—signing more than 150 executive orders in just over 150 days, sidelining Congress, and pressuring the institutions that were designed to check his authority. His supporters call it common sense. Critics call it dangerous. Either way, it's a fundamental shift in American governance—one that's unlike anything happening in any other major democracy.While Congress has largely collapsed into partisan submission, and the DOJ and other power ministries face political purges, one institution still stands: the courts. In this episode, Ian Bremmer speaks with New York Times Magazine staff writer and Yale Law School's Emily Bazelon about how the judiciary is holding up under pressure, what rulings to watch, and whether the rule of law can survive the Trump revolution.Host: Ian BremmerGuest: Emily Bazelon   Subscribe to the GZERO World with Ian Bremmer Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.

President Trump has never been shy about his revolutionary ambitions. In his second term, he's moved aggressively to consolidate power within the executive branch—signing more than 150 executive orders in just over 150 days, sidelining Congress, and pressuring the institutions that were designed to check his authority. His supporters call it common sense. Critics call it dangerous. Either way, it's a fundamental shift in American governance—one that's unlike anything happening in any other major democracy.While Congress has largely collapsed into partisan submission, and the DOJ and other power ministries face political purges, one institution still stands: the courts. In this episode, Ian Bremmer speaks with New York Times Magazine staff writer and Yale Law School's Emily Bazelon about how the judiciary is holding up under pressure, what rulings to watch, and whether the rule of law can survive the Trump revolution.Host: Ian BremmerGuest: Emily Bazelon   Subscribe to the GZERO World with Ian Bremmer Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.

It's no coincidence that we are releasing this special episode of the Travel Writing Podcast on Friday the 13th. La Carmina is a multi-talented author, influencer, blogger, food writer, television personality, and expert in the mysterious fringe communities that most tourists never even catch a glimpse of. She has authored a highly acclaimed treatise on Satanism (The Little Book of Satanism), befriended author-phenomenon of Prozac Nation fame, Elizabeth Wurtzel, and brought readers into the worlds of fringe and underground subcultures, sincerely understanding and cherishing these communities while interpreting them for the uninformed. In this episode, we trace La Carmina's unusual (or, as she clarifies, perhaps not so unusual) path from Yale Law School to travel writing. We talk about how she carved a distinct niche in a crowded field, and she shares tips for new writers on how to do the same. We also talk about fringe cultures, making meaningful connections while traveling, and of course, we bust myths of Satanism. Listen below or find the Travel Writing Podcast on Spotify or iTunes.

Send us a textIn this candid conversation, Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll joins Joe to pull back the curtain on what it really takes to modernize a military while staying grounded in soldier-level feedback. From wrestling with “irrationality and stupidity at scale” in the Pentagon to launching the Army Transformation Initiative, Driscoll shares why he's flipping tables—sometimes almost literally—to give soldiers the tools and trust they need to win the next fight. In this episode, they explore:How a 15-year “gap decade” in law, finance, and private equity enriched Driscoll's return to uniform and deepened his respect for everyday soldiersThe Army Transformation Initiative—delivering critical warfighting capabilities, optimizing force structure, and eliminating waste and obsolete programsA Fort Jackson drone drill where recruits with just five weeks in the Army changed training doctrine—proof that innovation starts at E-1Seasons vs. “work-life balance”: why high-tempo service demands conscious trade-offs at home, and how Driscoll keeps perspective as a husband and dad of twoThe IED-factory raid where rules forbade cutting a $2 padlock, and what it taught him about broken feedback loops in combatConcrete ways leaders at every level can accelerate change: send honest ground-truth up the chain, embrace small-unit credit-card innovation, and demand that processes serve soldiers firstWhether you're a private, a Pentagon staffer, or a curious civilian, this episode offers a front-row seat to the Army's most ambitious overhaul in decades—and a master class in leading large-scale change without losing sight of character, family, and the people who do the fighting.Daniel P. Driscoll is the 26th Secretary of the Army, sworn in on February 25, 2025. He leads the Army's efforts in operations, modernization, and resource management for nearly one million Soldiers and more than 265,000 Army Civilians.A former Army officer and business executive, Driscoll brings a diverse background in military service, law, and the private sector. Commissioned as an Armor Officer in 2007, he served with the 10th Mountain Division and deployed to Baghdad in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. His military honors include the Army Commendation Medal, Ranger Tab, and Combat Action Badge.Following his service, he earned a J.D. from Yale Law School and held leadership roles in investment banking, private equity, and venture capital, including serving as COO of a $200 million fund. He holds a B.S. in Business Administration from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.He is married to his high-school sweetheart, and they have two children.A Special Thanks to Our Sponsors!Veteran-founded Adyton. Step into the next generation of equipment management with Log-E by Adyton. Whether you are doing monthly inventories or preparing for deployment, Log-E is your pocket property book, giving real-time visibility into equipment status and mission readiness. Learn more about how Log-E can revolutionize your property tracking process here!Meet ROGER Bank—a modern, digital bank built for military members, by military members. With early payday, no fees, high-yield accounts, and real support, it's banking that gets you. Funds are FDIC insured through Citizens Bank of Edmond, so you can bank with confidence and peace of mind. 

The Christiana Incident offers a snapshot of the U.S. when the country was sorting into states where slavery was upheld and states that had abolished it, and what racist tension looked like at border states in the mid-1850s. Research: “The Christiana Affair Again.” New York Times. Sept. 20, 1851. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1851/09/20/87821677.pdf?pdf_redirect=true&ip=0 “Christiana Resistance 1851.” Christiana Historical Society. https://www.christianahistoricalsociety.com/christiana-resistance “The Christiana Trials.” New York Times. Nov. 4, 1851. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1851/11/04/87823549.pdf?pdf_redirect=true&ip=0 The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. "Fugitive Slave Acts". Encyclopedia Britannica, 28 Feb. 2025, https://www.britannica.com/event/Fugitive-Slave-Acts “Fatal Fugitive Slave Riot.” Boston Evening Transcript. Sept. 12, 1851. https://www.newspapers.com/image/734734274/ Forbes, David R. “A True Story of the Christiana Riot.” The Sun Printing House. Quarryville, PA. 1898. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044018986661&view=1up&seq=7 “Fugitive Slave Act 1850.” Yale Law School. Lillian Goldman Law Library. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/fugitive.asp “Fugitive Slave Riot in Lancaster Co., Pa.” New York Times. Sept. 18, 1851. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1851/09/18/109920970.pdf?pdf_redirect=true&ip=0 “Christiana Riot Trial.” Encyclopedia of Greater Philadelphia. 2015. https://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/essays/christiana-riot-trial/#national-history-day Parker, William. “A Freedman’s Story. The Atlantic. 1866. https://www.christianahistoricalsociety.com/_files/ugd/f64fcb_e6cde1713eb34263af1f191b3f349e21.pdf “Who was William Parker?” Christiana Historical Society. https://www.christianahistoricalsociety.com/william-parker See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When Professor Asha Rangappa began posting online about the lessons she was teaching in the Yale University course on Russian intelligence and information warfare, the public took notice. Many reached out for a copy of the syllabus, and began lamenting that they couldn't take her course. This led to the creation of a series of free lessons and presentations for the public through The Freedom Academy – which is Professor Rangappa's popular Substack. In this episode, we unpack key concepts taught by The Freedom Academy, including: how propaganda reaches us; the Alien Enemies Act of 1798; due process; civic literacy; the characteristics of truth tellers; transparency and accountability as pillars of democracy; and what happens when public trust erodes. Our guest is: Asha Rangappa, who is assistant dean and a senior lecturer at Yale University's Jackson School of Global Affairs and a former Associate Dean at Yale Law School. Prior to her current position, Asha served as a Special Agent in the New York Division of the FBI, specializing in counterintelligence investigations. Her work involved assessing threats to national security, conducting classified investigations on suspected foreign agents and performing undercover work. While in the FBI, Asha gained experience in electronic surveillance, interview and interrogation techniques, firearms and the use of deadly force. She received her law degree from Yale Law School where she was a Coker Fellow in Constitutional Law, and served as a law clerk to the Honorable Juan R. Torruella on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in San Juan, Puerto Rico. She is admitted to the State Bar of New York (2003) and Connecticut (2003). Asha has published op-eds in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post among others and is currently a legal contributor for ABC News. She is on the board of editors of Just Security and a member of the Council of Foreign Relations. She created the popular Substack called The Freedom Academy. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is the producer and show host of the Academic Life podcast. She holds a PhD in history, which she uses to explore what stories we tell and what happens to those we never tell. She works as a developmental editor for scholarly projects. Playlist for listeners: Immigration Realities Understanding Disinformation The Ungrateful Refugee Where is home? Who gets believed? Belonging Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by downloading and sharing episodes. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 250+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

When Professor Asha Rangappa began posting online about the lessons she was teaching in the Yale University course on Russian intelligence and information warfare, the public took notice. Many reached out for a copy of the syllabus, and began lamenting that they couldn't take her course. This led to the creation of a series of free lessons and presentations for the public through The Freedom Academy – which is Professor Rangappa's popular Substack. In this episode, we unpack key concepts taught by The Freedom Academy, including: how propaganda reaches us; the Alien Enemies Act of 1798; due process; civic literacy; the characteristics of truth tellers; transparency and accountability as pillars of democracy; and what happens when public trust erodes. Our guest is: Asha Rangappa, who is assistant dean and a senior lecturer at Yale University's Jackson School of Global Affairs and a former Associate Dean at Yale Law School. Prior to her current position, Asha served as a Special Agent in the New York Division of the FBI, specializing in counterintelligence investigations. Her work involved assessing threats to national security, conducting classified investigations on suspected foreign agents and performing undercover work. While in the FBI, Asha gained experience in electronic surveillance, interview and interrogation techniques, firearms and the use of deadly force. She received her law degree from Yale Law School where she was a Coker Fellow in Constitutional Law, and served as a law clerk to the Honorable Juan R. Torruella on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in San Juan, Puerto Rico. She is admitted to the State Bar of New York (2003) and Connecticut (2003). Asha has published op-eds in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post among others and is currently a legal contributor for ABC News. She is on the board of editors of Just Security and a member of the Council of Foreign Relations. She created the popular Substack called The Freedom Academy. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is the producer and show host of the Academic Life podcast. She holds a PhD in history, which she uses to explore what stories we tell and what happens to those we never tell. She works as a developmental editor for scholarly projects. Playlist for listeners: Immigration Realities Understanding Disinformation The Ungrateful Refugee Where is home? Who gets believed? Belonging Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by downloading and sharing episodes. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 250+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/academic-life

When Professor Asha Rangappa began posting online about the lessons she was teaching in the Yale University course on Russian intelligence and information warfare, the public took notice. Many reached out for a copy of the syllabus, and began lamenting that they couldn't take her course. This led to the creation of a series of free lessons and presentations for the public through The Freedom Academy – which is Professor Rangappa's popular Substack. In this episode, we unpack key concepts taught by The Freedom Academy, including: how propaganda reaches us; the Alien Enemies Act of 1798; due process; civic literacy; the characteristics of truth tellers; transparency and accountability as pillars of democracy; and what happens when public trust erodes. Our guest is: Asha Rangappa, who is assistant dean and a senior lecturer at Yale University's Jackson School of Global Affairs and a former Associate Dean at Yale Law School. Prior to her current position, Asha served as a Special Agent in the New York Division of the FBI, specializing in counterintelligence investigations. Her work involved assessing threats to national security, conducting classified investigations on suspected foreign agents and performing undercover work. While in the FBI, Asha gained experience in electronic surveillance, interview and interrogation techniques, firearms and the use of deadly force. She received her law degree from Yale Law School where she was a Coker Fellow in Constitutional Law, and served as a law clerk to the Honorable Juan R. Torruella on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in San Juan, Puerto Rico. She is admitted to the State Bar of New York (2003) and Connecticut (2003). Asha has published op-eds in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post among others and is currently a legal contributor for ABC News. She is on the board of editors of Just Security and a member of the Council of Foreign Relations. She created the popular Substack called The Freedom Academy. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is the producer and show host of the Academic Life podcast. She holds a PhD in history, which she uses to explore what stories we tell and what happens to those we never tell. She works as a developmental editor for scholarly projects. Playlist for listeners: Immigration Realities Understanding Disinformation The Ungrateful Refugee Where is home? Who gets believed? Belonging Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by downloading and sharing episodes. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 250+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

When Professor Asha Rangappa began posting online about the lessons she was teaching in the Yale University course on Russian intelligence and information warfare, the public took notice. Many reached out for a copy of the syllabus, and began lamenting that they couldn't take her course. This led to the creation of a series of free lessons and presentations for the public through The Freedom Academy – which is Professor Rangappa's popular Substack. In this episode, we unpack key concepts taught by The Freedom Academy, including: how propaganda reaches us; the Alien Enemies Act of 1798; due process; civic literacy; the characteristics of truth tellers; transparency and accountability as pillars of democracy; and what happens when public trust erodes. Our guest is: Asha Rangappa, who is assistant dean and a senior lecturer at Yale University's Jackson School of Global Affairs and a former Associate Dean at Yale Law School. Prior to her current position, Asha served as a Special Agent in the New York Division of the FBI, specializing in counterintelligence investigations. Her work involved assessing threats to national security, conducting classified investigations on suspected foreign agents and performing undercover work. While in the FBI, Asha gained experience in electronic surveillance, interview and interrogation techniques, firearms and the use of deadly force. She received her law degree from Yale Law School where she was a Coker Fellow in Constitutional Law, and served as a law clerk to the Honorable Juan R. Torruella on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in San Juan, Puerto Rico. She is admitted to the State Bar of New York (2003) and Connecticut (2003). Asha has published op-eds in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post among others and is currently a legal contributor for ABC News. She is on the board of editors of Just Security and a member of the Council of Foreign Relations. She created the popular Substack called The Freedom Academy. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is the producer and show host of the Academic Life podcast. She holds a PhD in history, which she uses to explore what stories we tell and what happens to those we never tell. She works as a developmental editor for scholarly projects. Playlist for listeners: Immigration Realities Understanding Disinformation The Ungrateful Refugee Where is home? Who gets believed? Belonging Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! You can support the show by downloading and sharing episodes. Join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 250+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Mark Gerson shares timeless, practical insights about work–sourced from the Bible and supported by modern social science.— YOU'LL LEARN — 1) Why Bible has helpful gems for folks from all religion–or lack thereof 2) The one question that leads to greater meaning 3) The optimal number of hours to work in a weekSubscribe or visit AwesomeAtYourJob.com/ep1064 for clickable versions of the links below. — ABOUT MARK — Mark Gerson, a New York–based entrepreneur and philanthropist, is the cofounder of Gerson Lehrman Group, 3I Members, United Hatzalah of Israel, and African Mission Healthcare—where he and his wife, Rabbi Erica Gerson, made the largest gift ever to Christian medical missionaries.A graduate of Williams College and Yale Law School, Mark is the author of the national bestseller The Telling: How Judaism's Essential Book Reveals the Meaning of Life. Mark's articles and essays on subjects ranging from Frank Sinatra to the biblical Jonah to the Torah and science of clothing have been published in The New Republic, USA Today, Commentary, and Christian Broadcast Network. Mark lives with his wife and their four children.• Book: God Was Right: How Modern Social Science Proves the Torah Is True • Email: Mark@GodWasRight.com • Website: GodWasRight.com— RESOURCES MENTIONED IN THE SHOW — • Study: “Crafting a Job: Revisioning Employees as Active Crafters of Their Work” by Amy Wrzesniewski and Jane E. Dutton • Study: “Job crafting: A meta-analysis of relationships with individual differences, job characteristics, and work outcomes” by Cort W. Rudolph, Ian M. Katz, Kristi N. Lavigne, and Hannes Zacher • Study: “The Productivity of Working Hours” by John Pencavel • Study: “Global, regional, and national burdens of ischemic heart disease and stroke attributable to exposure to long working hours for 194 countries, 2000–2016: A systematic analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury” by Frank Pega et al. • Study: “Enclothed cognition” by Hajo Adam and Adam D. Galinsky • Study: “Sartorial Symbols of Social Class Elicit Class-Consistent Behavioral and Physiological Responses: A Dyadic Approach” by Michael W. Kraus and Wendy Berry Mendes • Study: “That Swimsuit Becomes You: Sex Differences in Self-Objectification, Restrained Eating, and Math Performance” by Barbara L. Fredrickson, Tomi-Ann Roberts, Stephanie M. Noll, Diane M. Quinn, and Jean M. Twenge• Video: Selective attention test • Past episode: 001: Communicating with Inspiration and Clarity with Mawi Asgedom • Past episode: 273: Taking Control of your Career with Korn Ferry's Gary Burnison • Past episode: 278: The Critical Factors Separating High and Low Performers with Morten Hansen • Past episode: 327: Unclog Your Brain through Unfocusing with Dr. Srini Pillay — THANK YOU SPONSORS! — • Strawberry.me. Claim your $50 credit and build momentum in your career with Strawberry.me/AwesomeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This week, we're speaking with Anastasia Boyko, a legal futurist and product evangelist at Filevine, a legal work platform for law firms and businesses. Anastasia has had a diverse career path, from practicing tax law to transformational and change management roles to legal education. She has created and led innovative programs at Yale Law School and the University of Utah SJ Quinney College of Law, where she has applied her knowledge of legal practice and business. Today, at Filevine, she collaborates with her team on creating and incubating new products in legal tech. In our conversation, Anastasia tells us about her journey to the legal field and why she ultimately decided to finish law school. We also discuss the need for empathy and kindness when training new lawyers, her exciting role as a legal futurist, and why law students should develop a range of skills. Read the full transcript of today's episode here: https://www.seyfarth.com/dir_docs/podcast_transcripts/Pioneers_%20AnastasiaBoyko.pdf

JD Vance has had an unorthodox rise to power. After a troubled childhood, he joined the Marines, graduated from Yale Law School, became a best-selling author, and then won a seat in the U.S. Senate. And now, at only 40, he is Vice President to Donald Trump, a man who Vance once described as "America's Hitler" and "cultural heroin." We're joined by The Atlantic's George Packer. His most recent piece, “The Talented Mr. Vance,” explores Vance's political transformation and whether or not he genuinely evolved his political views or cynically abandoned his principles for ambition. We also take a look at the Democrats' path forward. Packer shares how they can respond to Trump's appeal to disengaged voters. Read Packer's writing in The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/author/george-packer/ 

Our VP used to think his path to power was through the ruling class at Yale Law School. But after 2016, he saw that his route was through Trump, so he swapped one set of elites for another. And now as a lord among the MAGA ruling class, he's embracing his true cruel, lying self—and railing against the globalists who nitpick about this silly due process thing. Meanwhile, even Elon doesn't like the bankruptcy-threatening reconciliation bill, even if it's larded with kickbacks just for him. Plus, America: stay and fight. And the biggest theft in the history of the presidency is happening every day right before our eyes. New Mexico congresswoman Melanie Stansbury and The Atlantic's George Packer join Tim Miller. show notes George's profile of the VP, "The Talented Mr. Vance" Rep. Stansbury being featured on Jimmy Kimmel Live! George's piece, "Be A Patriot" George on Ross Douthat Plus, tickets for our live show “Free Andry” on June 6 in DC

Join former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti and former FBI Special Agent and Yale Law School lecturer Asha Rangappa as they break down the biggest legal and political stories with sharp insight, real experience, and an unapologetic pro-democracy perspective. No spin, no both-sides nonsense — just the facts, the law, and what it all means for our democracy. This week Asha and Renato get you caught up on the Harvard fist fight with the Trump Administration and how the Supreme Court may have just overturned on its shadow docket, a 90 year old legal precedent to help Trump. Catch it all exclusively on the Legal AF YouTube channel and on the MeidasTouch Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Attorney Alex Taubes, a Yale Law School graduate and dedicated civil rights lawyer based in New Haven, Connecticut, delves into systemic misconduct within the criminal justice system. With a focus on wrongful convictions, police brutality, and governmental negligence, Taubes shares insights from his extensive legal career, including organizing the "7 Days of Truth with Proof" rally to highlight wrongful incarcerations. He discusses his efforts to combat systemic injustices and his commitment to advocating for the underrepresented. #CivilRights #CriminalJusticeReform #AlexTaubes #WrongfulConvictions #PoliceMisconduct #JusticeForAll #LegalAdvocacy #SystemicReform Connect with Alex Taubes: https://taubeslaw.com/ Hosted, Executive Produced & Edited By Ian Bick: https://www.instagram.com/ian_bick/?hl=en https://ianbick.com/ Presented by Tyson 2.0 & Wooooo Energy: https://tyson20.com/ https://woooooenergy.com/ Buy Merch: https://convictclothing.net/collections/convict-clothing-x-ian-bick Timestamps: 00:00:00 Journey to Becoming a Lawyer in Connecticut 00:03:53 Navigating Private Legal Practice and Client Connections 00:08:20 Impact of Free Phone Calls and Tablets in Prisons 00:12:00 The Role of Unions in Connecticut Corrections 00:15:46 Gender Dynamics and Misconduct in Correctional Facilities 00:19:39 The Complexity of Judging Horrific Crimes 00:23:39 Failures in Accommodating Mental Health in Prisons 00:27:27 Uncovering Connecticut's Controversial Cases 00:31:26 The Division in Public Opinion: CEO Case and Societal Instability 00:35:17 The Struggles and Injustices in Civil Rights Cases 00:39:14 Alleged Police Misconduct in Waterbury Trial 00:43:04 Lawsuit Against City Over Workers' Compensation 00:46:43 Prison Leans and Legal Battles in Connecticut 00:50:36 Jury Selection in Civil vs. Criminal Cases 00:54:37 Challenges with Prosecutorial Power and Jury Influence 00:58:28 Challenges in the Criminal Justice System 01:02:15 Advancing Yourself Beyond Chess Powered by: Just Media House : https://www.justmediahouse.com/ Creative direction, design, assets, support by FWRD: https://www.fwrd.co Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jordana is a Yale Law School graduate and is the Founder and CEO of JC Coaching and Consulting and an Adjunct Professor of Law at Fordham University School of Law. Jordana's journey is a story of intense burnout and finding the passion that was always within her. Jordana is a guru of positive lawyering, taking fellow law students and Lawyers to move from fear to flourishing!Jordana and I started before Yale Law School, where she went through the why behind the Law School decision. She wanted to do something bigger and better in her life, and being a type A person, decided that Law School, and pursuing to be as a Federal Prosecutor would be the path to take. Entering her first year, Jordana would work tirelessly to be at the top of her class and gain those prestigious summer jobs. When then spoke about the various internships and jobs that Jordana held leading up to the turning point in her career. She would chase the shiny gold stars of legal prestigious, but at the cost of her mental and physical health, enduring stress and anxiety all for goals that she came to realize she would never reach. After working as a clerk for two years, she finally decided enough was enough, and turned to the academic side of the Law. The sparks of passion would fly as Jordana explored the world of positive psychology, laying down the foundations for her future Positive Lawyering class, which she teaches to Law Students today, and her Coaching and Consulting company. Jordana's insights on Positive Lawyering offered an overwhelming amount of wisdom for Lawyers and Law Students, living a life guided not by your fears but your values. She would focus on perfectionism, well-being, and many other topics to further show her unbelievable expertise in the space. Jordana is a well-known member of the legal community, and this conversation is one you do not want to miss, as anyone can take away wisdom from Jordana that can guide them for the rest of their career! Jordana's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jordanaconfinoJordana's Website: https://www.jordanaconfino.com/Be sure to check out the Official Sponsors for the Lawyers in the Making Podcast:Rhetoric - takes user briefs and motions and compares them against the text of opinions written by judges to identify ways to tailor their arguments to better persuade the judges handling their cases. Rhetoric's focus is on persuasion and helps users find new ways to improve their odds of success through more persuasive arguments. Find them here: userhetoric.comThe Law School Operating System™ Recorded Course - This course is for ambitious law students who want a proven, simple system to learn every topic in their classes to excel in class and on exams. Go to www.lisablasser.com, check out the student tab with course offerings, and use code LSOSNATE10 at checkout for 10% off Lisa's recorded course!Start LSAT - Founded by former guest and 21-year-old super-star, Alden Spratt, Start LSAT was built upon breaking down barriers, allowing anyone access to high-quality LSAT Prep. For $110 you get yourself the Start LSAT self-paced course, and using code LITM10 you get 10% off the self-paced course! Check out Alden and Start LSAT at startlsat.com and use code LITM10 for 10% off the self-paced course!Lawyers in the Making Podcast is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Lawyers in the Making Podcast at lawyersinthemaking.substack.com/subscribe

On this episode of Future of Freedom, host Scot Bertram is joined by two guests with different viewpoints about whether federal involvement safeguards or endangers free speech on college campuses. First on the show is Keith E. Whittington, is the David Boies Professor of Law at Yale Law School and founding chair of the Academic Freedom Alliance. Later, we hear from Charles Fain Lehman, fellow at the Manhattan Institute and senior editor of City Journal. You can find Keith on X @kewhittington and Charles at @CharlesFLehman. Both have written essays at The Dispatch on this topic. Whittington's can be found here while Lehman's can be found here.

Emily Bazelon, staff writer for The New York Times Magazine, co-host of Slate's "Political Gabfest" podcast, Truman Capote fellow for creative writing and law at Yale Law School and author of Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution  and End Mass Incarceration (Random House, 2019), offers legal analysis of the Supreme Court decision to continue to prohibit the Trump Administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members, and shares her take on how the courts are limiting executive power (or not).

We unpack SCOTUS's decision to continue to prohibit the Trump administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged gang members.On Today's Show:Emily Bazelon, staff writer for The New York Times Magazine, co-host of Slate's "Political Gabfest" podcast, Truman Capote fellow for creative writing and law at Yale Law School and author of Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration (Random House, 2019), offers legal analysis on how the courts are limiting executive power (or not).

On Thursday, the Trump administration's effort to limit birthright citizenship ended up in front of the Supreme Court.Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court for The New York Times, discusses the White House's unusual legal strategy for defending its plan, and what it might mean for the future of presidential power.Guest: Adam Liptak, covers the Supreme Court. A graduate of Yale Law School, he practiced law for 14 years before joining The Times in 2002.Background reading: Adam Liptak wrote about the unusual features of the birthright citizenship case.Adam also wrote about the Supreme Court justices across the ideological spectrum who have been critical of nationwide injunctions, which apply to everyone affected by a challenged law, regulation or executive action.Charlie Savage and Alan Feuer shared four takeaways from the birthright citizenship case.For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. Photo: Drew Angerer/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

Doug Owens was born and raised in Salt Lake City and graduated from the University of Utah and Yale Law School. He and his wife Cynthia Smart Owens have four children and are proud to call Millcreek their home. As an attorney, Doug has three decades' experience resolving complex commercial, environmental, and employment issues. Twenty-five years ago, Doug took two years off from his career to stay home with three little boys while Cynthia finished medical residency. Cynthia currently practices medicine at St. Mark's Hospital. Doug is committed to improving education, keeping Utah's economy strong, protecting our air, and preserving the places that make Utah special. Doug is the founder of Utah Outdoor Partners, a non-profit organization launched to raise awareness of the value of Utah's outdoors and promote the creation of parks, trails and other recreation infrastructure to keep pace with population growth.   

With the passing of Justice David Souter, the legal establishment has lost one of its most honored members.  In this and our next episode, we pay tribute to the man and his work with the help of an amazing roster of his former clerks, friends, and colleagues.  We begin with Judge Kevin Newsom from the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, and the Dean of the Yale Law School, Heather Gerken, who share their experience working closely with the Justice on the Supreme Court, as well as his role in their lives that did and does inspire them.  Meanwhile, Akhil, who considered the Justice a good friend and role model, offers an in-depth look at various aspects of the Justice, including why a Justice who disagreed with Akhil on method and, in many cases, substance, nevertheless is regarded by him as one of the great Justices in American history.  In our next episode we will have more guests whom we will reveal in the discussion during this episode.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

Earlier this year, President Trump signed an executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship. He has placed this issue at the forefront of his immigration agenda and it is now being taken up by the Supreme Court. To have this conversation, we've brought together a constitutional law scholar and a political commentator.Cristina Rodríguez is the Leighton Homer Surbeck Professor of Law at Yale Law School. In 2021, she was appointed by President Biden to co-chair the Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States. Her recent book is called The President and Immigration Law. She's also the co-host of the new podcast: Unsettled: Immigration in Turbulent Times.Rod D. Martin writes The Rod Martin Report on Substack. He is also the Founder and CEO of Martin Capital. As a tech entrepreneur and venture capitalist, Rod was previously an advisor to Peter Thiel. Rod also served as policy director to Mike Huckabee, the former Governor of Arkansas.We talk a lot about the 14th Amendment in this episode. It was ratified in 1868 to give formerly enslaved people the right to vote. Here's what it says: “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Keep that phrase in mind. “Subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” It'll come up a lot.Our guests also discuss the Supreme Court cases Elk v Wilkins, Slaughterhouse, and Wong Kim Ark. All you need to know for this episode is: those rulings influenced the interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Last note, this episode is moderated by co-host and co-founder, Catherine Cushenberry. Questions or comments about this episode? Email us at podcast@thedisagreement.com or find us on X and Instagram @thedisagreementhq. Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thedisagreement.substack.com/

Colleges use advanced data tracking to fine-tune scholarship offers based on what they think you'll pay and to make you feel good about your price. Ben and Nathan explain how firms analyze digital behavior, like email click speed, to calculate offers. Wealthy students get merit aid, lower-income students get need-based aid, but both often pay the same price. The result is personalized pricing that favors schools. Later, they cover Yale Law Dean Heather Gerken's push to ditch rankings and focus on need-based aid. Ben suggests two fixes for law schools: eliminate student loans and scrap ABA requirements. The episode also covers the Perkins Coie ruling, another round of the Personal Statement Gong Show, and Tips from a Departing Demon. Study with our Free PlanDownload our iOS appWatch Episode 506 on YouTubeRegister for Parents' Night Vol. 30:30 – Law Schools Know What You'll PayBen and Nathan cover a NYTimes article that reveals how schools set tuition prices and financial aid. Law schools work with data firms that track every digital move, including email clicks, to determine how much you're willing to pay. They then personalize your financial aid offer accordingly. Out-of-state students are targeted with high sticker prices and bigger discounts, which still net higher profits for schools. Merit aid and need-based aid are distributed strategically so that students from different income levels often pay the same amount. This model lets law schools charge each student a different price, while making them all feel like they got a deal. Applying early signals price sensitivity and can help you get a better offer.EAB Sales Presentation32:07 – Abandon RankingsHeather Gerken, the Dean of Yale Law School, calls for moving away from law school rankings. Despite talk of supporting need-based aid, schools still spend ten times more on merit-based scholarships. The Trump administration's past proposal to cut loans for schools with high default rates could help stop these  “scammerships.” Ben argues that two reforms are key: end federal student loans and overhaul ABA accreditation requirements. But without new incentives, the tragedy of the commons suggests schools will keep playing the rankings game.57:28 – Big Law vs. Trump: Perkins DecisionIn a follow-up to the discussion on Episode 505, Ben and Nathan break down a new court ruling that found Trump's executive order, which attempted to penalize Perkins Coie, is unconstitutional. 59:43 – Personal Statement Gong ShowGabriella steps into the spotlight as the latest contestant in the Personal Statement Gong Show. Ben and Nathan read her personal statement and hit the gong the moment something goes wrong. The standing record to beat is ten lines, held by Greta.1:12:10 – Tips from a Departing DemonSam encourages students to follow the Demon's core advice: slow down, understand what you are reading, and solve each question. 1:16:15 – Index CalculationsThe Demon Scholarship Calculator is an estimate built on data from previous years. The proven way to go to law school for free is to improve your LSAT and keep your GPA high.1:18:54 - Word of the Week - Blithely“The government blithely describes the statements set out in Section 1 of EO 14230 as 'not seriously contested' and 'matters of public record.' This description is inaccurate.”

Justice David Souter has died.  Souter was one of the most private, low-profile justices ever to have served on the Supreme Court. He rarely gave interviews or speeches. Yet his tenure was anything but low profile. Deemed a “home run” nominee by Republicans, Souter defied partisan expectations on the bench and ultimately ceded his seat to a Democratic president.As we reflect on his legacy, we wanted to share this episode again.  Produced two years ago, this episode tells the story of how “No More Souters” became a rallying cry for Republicans and inspired a backlash that would change the Court forever.Voices in the episode include:• Ashley Lopez — NPR political correspondent• Anna Sale — host of Slate's Death, Sex & Money podcast • Tinsley Yarbrough — author and former political science professor at East Carolina University• Heather Gerken — Dean of Yale Law School and former Justice Souter clerk• Kermit Roosevelt III — professor at University of Pennsylvania School of Law and former Justice Souter clerk• Judge Peter Rubin — Associate Justice on Massachusetts Appeals Court and former Justice Souter clerk• Governor John H. Sununu — former governor of New Hampshire and President George H.W. Bush's Chief of StaffLearn more:• 1992: Planned Parenthood v. Casey• 1992: Lee v. Weisman• 2000: Bush v. Gore• 2009: Citizens United v. FEC

In this episode, I'm joined by the incredible Mary Marantz, author of Underestimated. Mary and I dive into her inspiring journey—from growing up in a trailer to attending Yale Law School—and explore the power of overcoming perfectionism, managing fear, and embracing slow growth in business. Mary shares insights from her book, including how fear shows up in different forms and how to overcome it to unlock your potential. If you've ever felt stuck or underestimated, this episode is a must-listen!   Resources Mentioned: Underestimated book: namethefear.com Achiever Type Quiz: achieverquiz.com Follow Mary on Instagram: @marymarantz

MILT HEUMANN received a BA from Brooklyn College in 1968, and a Ph.D. from Yale University in 1976. He taught as an assistant and associate professor at the University of Michigan from 1973 to 1980, was a Guggenheim Fellow at Yale Law School from 1980 to 1981, and has been a professor (1981), and then Distinguished Professor (2013) at Rutgers until the present. He was Chair of the Department of Political Science at Rutgers from 19997 to 2003. During the 1980's and 1990's he was also an occasional Visiting Lecturer (for courses on criminal sentencing) at Yale Law School. Professor Heumann has written extensively in the field of criminal justice, and more recently also in the “right to privacy.”Supreme Court Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson cited Prof. Heumann's research extensively in her undergraduate honors thesis at Harvard College, another indicator of his lasting impact on undergraduate students.

On behalf of Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region and its National Security Task Force the Hoover Institution held a Taiwan Roundtable Discussion on Tuesday, February 18, 2025, from 5:00 - 6:00 pm PT. Taiwan is facing a potential constitutional crisis. In December 2024, Taiwan's opposition-controlled legislature voted to impose a 2/3 supermajority quorum for the Constitutional Court to hear new cases. The legislature then voted down all the new nominees to the Court, leaving it with only 8 of members and unable to meet the new quorum requirement. The government has appealed to the Court to meet anyway and rule that the new amendments are unconstitutional. In this discussion, three experts on Taiwan's politics and judicial system discuss the factors leading up to this confrontation, the options facing the court, and the potential for deeper reforms to strengthen judicial independence in the face of a deepening confrontation between the ruling and opposition parties. ABOUT THE PARTICIPANTS Chien-Chih Lin is an associate research professor at Institutum Iurisprudentiae, Academia Sinica and an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of National Development, National Taiwan University. He received the LLM & JSD degrees from the University of Chicago. His academic interests focus on comparative constitutional law in Asia. Lin is the coauthor ofConstitutional Convergence in East Asia (2022) and Ultimate Economic Conflict between China and Democratic Countries (2022). His articles can be found in both peer-reviewed and student-edited law journals as well as edited volumes, including Oxford Handbook of Constitutional Law in Asia, American Journal of Comparative Law, and International Journal of Constitutional Law. He is the book review editor of International Journal of Constitutional Law. Weitseng Chen is a faculty member at the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law, specializing in law and economic development, law and politics, and legal history in the context of Greater China. He has recently published several books, including Regime Type and Beyond: The Transformation of Police in Asia (CUP, 2023), Authoritarian Legality in Asia: Formation, Development and Transition (CUP, 2019), The Beijing Consensus? How China Has Changed the Western Ideas of Law and Economic Development (CUP, 2017), Property and Trust Law: Taiwan (with Yun-Chien Chang & Y. J. Wu, Kluwer, 2017), and Law and Economic Miracle: Interaction Between Taiwan's Development and Economic Laws After WWII (in Chinese, 2000). Weitseng Chen earned his JSD from Yale Law School. Prior to joining NUS, he served as a Hewlett Fellow at Stanford's Center for Democracy,Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) and practiced as a corporate lawyer in the Greater China region with Davis Polk & Wardwell. Kharis Templeman is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and part of the Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific. Templeman is a political scientist (Ph.D. 2012, Michigan) with research interests in Taiwan politics, democratization, elections and election management, party system development, and politics and security issues in Pacific Asia.

For a special episode of the Anchoring Truths Podcast, we bring you a presentation featuring Prof. Julia Mahoney of the University of Virginia School of Law. Prof. Mahoney examines how the Classical Legal Tradition has been making a return in American law. She discusses some recent opinions that provide a hopeful opportunity for its return to legal practice and describes the rising interest in this perspective within legal academia. Julia D. Mahoney teaches courses in property, government finance, constitutional law and nonprofit organizations. A graduate of Yale Law School, she joined the University of Virginia faculty as an associate professor in 1999 and is now John S. Battle Professor of Law. She has also taught at the University of Southern California Law School and the University of Chicago Law School, and before entering the legal academy, practiced law at the New York firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. Her scholarly articles include works on land preservation, eminent domain, health care reform and property rights in human biological materials.

Ananda is the author of Here For The Joy (2022) and Good News About the World Falling Apart (2025) the latter work being the subject of this podcast. Ananda went to Andover, Oberlin and Yale Law School and later taught English at St. Ann's School in Brooklyn.  In 1994, he left the city for upstate New York where he worked as a carpenter and mechanic and started seriously following his bliss.  He retired from carpentry when he hit 56, but never stopped teaching:  twelve years guiding students of shamanism at Spirit Hollow, the nature and spirituality center he co-founded, and the last twenty years and counting as an adjunct instructor of anthropology, history and mythology at the Community College of Vermont. For more information about Ananda and his many offerings, please see:  https://anandaforest.com/ This podcast is available on your favorite podcast feed, or here: https://endoftheroad.libsyn.com/episode-314-ananda-forest-good-news-about-the-world-falling-apart-the-third-turning-of-human-consciousness Have a blessed week!

"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again" is far easier said than done, yet if anyone's story exemplifies why we shouldn't let failure stand in our way, it's Girls Who Code founder Reshma Saujani. From applying to Yale Law School three times before being accepted, to becoming the first Indian American woman to run for Congress, Reshma refused to let "no" stop her from succeeding.  Saujani joins Liz to discuss how this tenacity ultimately led her to create the nonprofit Girls Who Code, which has now taught over 700,000 girls and women to code across the country. She shares how being the daughter of immigrants drove her to want to make an impact in America, the country responsible for saving her parents' lives after they were expelled from Uganda. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

There's a geography of limitation that exists not on any map, but in the quiet territories of our own making. Stories that whisper: this is as far as you'll go. Today, we are talking with Mary Marantz - a woman who understands that our beginnings are not our boundaries. Growing up in a single-wide trailer on the tippy top of Fenwick Mountain, she learned something profound: that grace isn't about erasing your history, but making peace with it. Imagine a young girl watching the world from that precipice, learning that survival isn't just about enduring, but reimagining. Mary's journey from that trailer to Yale Law School isn't a bootstrapping narrative of triumph, but a meditation on grace, on the way unexpected paths unfold when we listen carefully to the whispers of our own potential. How do we create space between who we were told we could be and who we are actually called to become? How do we recognize that the most revolutionary act might be showing up, day after day, for the work that won't let go of us? Mary writes about fear like an old friend - not something to vanquish, but to understand. She knows that the stories we tell ourselves are powerful, that they can either keep us small or become the very ground from which we grow. So join us as we walk through those stories together - not as a roadmap, but as an invitation. Here's my conversation with Mary Marantz.Mary Marantz is the bestselling author of Dirt and Underestimated, as well as the host of the popular podcast The Mary Marantz Show. She grew up in a trailer in rural West Virginia and was the first in her family to go to college before going on to Yale for law school. Her work has been featured on CNN, MSN, Business Insider, Bustle, Thrive Global, Southern Living, Hallmark Home & Family and more. She and her husband Justin live in an 1880s fixer-upper by the sea in New Haven, Connecticut, with their two very fluffy golden retrievers, Goodspeed and Atticus. Learn more at MaryMarantz.com.Mary's Book:UnderestimatedSubscribe to Our Substack: Shifting CultureConnect with Joshua: jjohnson@allnations.usGo to www.shiftingculturepodcast.com to interact and donate. Every donation helps to produce more podcasts for you to enjoy.Follow on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Threads, Bluesky or YouTubeConsider Giving to the podcast and to the ministry that my wife and I do around the world. Just click on the support the show link below Support the show

Harold Hongju Koh, professor of international law and former dean at Yale Law School and former legal adviser of the U.S. Department of State, talks about President Trump's actions against big law firms that were involved in cases against the president or his businesses.

Mary Marantz knows how fear can hold us back. Even though she was able to leave the musty single-wide trailer of her childhood in West Virginia and make her way to Yale Law School, she always carried the fear that she would be found out. Even though she had worked hard and earned every grade and scholarship she received she thought others saw her as an imposter. So, she strove to be the best at everything she did, and she was. But the life of perfection has a way of draining the joy out of you. Mary finally realized that fear was holding her hostage to a life that didn't provide freedom and that he is a boring liar. In this episode she shares part of her fascinating story of growing up in rural West Virginia, which is the topic of her first book, Dirt, with a dad who was a proud eighth generation logger, a mom who cleaned houses and her amazing grandma Goldie. In her newest book, Underestimated, she shares how she overcame perfectionism, procrastination, people-pleasing and more. She understands the drive to prove others wrong and show everyone just how far you've come, while also doubting yourself at every turn. Mary has learned that we all must own the muddy parts of our stories so we can move forward in the purpose God has for us. Because, as Mary says, God does His best work in the muddy, messy, and broken if we'll only learn to dig in.  Go to Carolroper.org for show notes Join the Building Strong Homes community by signing up for email updates and receive my baked spaghetti recipe Also join the Building Strong Homes Facebook Community If you'd like to connect with me or have an idea for an episode you can email me at buildingstronghomes@gmail.com Watch on YouTube Underestimated: From a Single-Wide Trailer in W. Va. to Yale Law School withe Mary Marantz

What happens when the country that helped design the international human rights system starts to dismantle it?In this episode, we speak with the former president of the U.N. General Assembly, Ambassador Dennis Francis, about the growing threats to global cooperation and human rights—from authoritarian drift, to shrinking U.S. commitments, to rising fears inside the U.N. system itself. Is this the end of the liberal international order? And if so, what comes next?

Send us a textMary Marantz joins us to share insights from her new book "Underestimated: The Surprisingly Simple Shift to Quit Playing Small, Name the Fear, and Move Forward," revealing how we can overcome the invisible barriers that keep us from reaching our full potential.Mary is a Yale Law School graduate and the first in her immediate family to go to college. She is the bestselling author of the book “Dirt” about growing up in West Virginia and the highly-anticipated follow up "Slow Growth Equals Strong Roots." She is also the host of the wildly popular podcast The Mary Marantz Show.Join our conversation to discuss:• Fear is a "boring liar" that uses the same broken scripts on everyone• The "missing handbook for life" concept explains why we constantly second-guess ourselves • "Slow growth equals strong roots" - why consistency matters more than overnight success• Excellence combined with consistency creates an unstoppable formula• People-pleasing and "making ourselves small" keeps us from our purpose• Criticism hurts but isn't fatal - most people can't see your vision until it's complete• You don't need anyone's permission to pursue your unique callingVisit marymarantz.com to learn more, take the Achiever Quiz at AchieverQuiz.com to discover your achiever type, and pre-order the book at NameTheFear.com where you can also access the first chapter for free. Order Stephanie's new book Imagine More: Do What You Love, Discover Your Potential Learn more at StephanieNelson.comFollow us on Instagram @stephanie_nelson_cmFollow us on Facebook at CouponMom

Emily Bazelon, staff writer for The New York Times Magazine, co-host of Slate's "Political Gabfest" podcast, Truman Capote fellow for creative writing and law at Yale Law School and author of Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration (Random House, 2019), talks about the latest developments in the stand-off between a federal judge and the Trump administration over deportations, and other national news.

There's an ongoing stand-off between a federal judge and the Trump administration over their deportation practices. On Today's Show:Emily Bazelon, staff writer for The New York Times Magazine, co-host of Slate's "Political Gabfest" podcast, Truman Capote fellow for creative writing and law at Yale Law School and author of Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration (Random House, 2019), shares her legal and political analysis. 

What is constitutional private law, and how does it differ from the way we traditionally think about constitutional issues? When an individual employed by the government breaks the law, do we sue the person or the government? And what do these choices reveal about justice, accountability, and constitutional interpretation? This week Madison's Notes welcomes Garrett West, Associate Professor of Law at Yale Law School, for a deep dive into constitutional private law, an often-overlooked dimension of constitutional theory. While most discussions focus on government power and structure, this episode explores how constitutional principles might extend into private relationships and disputes. West breaks down essential legal vocabulary, examines unexpected historical shifts in constitutional doctrine, and analyzes how courts have grappled with applying constitutional norms beyond the state. From torts and remedies to federal courts and administrative law, this conversation challenges conventional boundaries and asks: Where does the Constitution's authority end? A must-listen for anyone interested in legal theory, civil liberties, and the evolving role of constitutional law in private life. Madison's Notes is the podcast of Princeton University's James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. Contributions to and/or sponsorship of any speaker does not constitute departmental or institutional endorsement of the specific program, speakers or views presented. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The morning of March 8, Mahmoud Khalil was detained at his apartment in New York City. Khalil is a 30-year-old Algerian citizen. He was born in Syria and is of Palestinian descent. He came to this country on a student visa in 2022, married an American citizen in 2023, became a green card holder in 2024, and finished his graduate studies at Columbia University in December 2024. Mahmoud was also the spokesman and negotiator for Columbia University Apartheid Divest, a group that says it is “fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization,” and which played an active role in the rioting that took over Columbia buildings last spring. He has not been charged with any crimes—at least not so far. But the White House wants to deport him on the grounds that he poses a threat to the foreign policy and national security interests of the United States. Secretary of State Marco Rubio went as far as to post on X: “We will be revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in America so they can be deported.” Many of us believe that Khalil's ideology is abhorrent. He enjoyed the United States' educational system—attending one of our most prestigious universities—while advocating for America's destruction and for a group that seeks the genocide of the Jewish people. At the same time, the case for his deportation is not clear-cut. Here's the divide: Some say this is an immigration case. As Free Press contributing editor Abigail Shrier has put it: “This is an immigration, not a free speech case. It's about whether the U.S. can set reasonable conditions on aliens for entry and residence.” But others say this is, in fact, a free speech case that cuts to the heart of our most cherished values. To figure all this out, we're hosting three of the smartest legal minds we know. Eugene Volokh is an expert on the Bill of Rights who is currently a senior fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution. He's also a contributor to Reason magazine, where he runs his own blog, The Volokh Conspiracy. Rabbi Dr. Mark Goldfeder is a practicing lawyer and the director of the National Jewish Advocacy Center. Just yesterday, he filed a lawsuit in the District Court for the Southern District of New York against Khalil and several others for material support for terror. Jed Rubenfeld is a Free Press columnist and a professor of constitutional law at Yale Law School. This case is one we have written about extensively in The Free Press—and one that we are actively debating in our newsroom. So we were thrilled to be able to bring together some of the smartest people on this complicated issue. If you liked what you heard from Honestly, the best way to support us is to go to TheFP.com and become a Free Press subscriber today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ralph welcomes New York Times journalist, David Enrich, author of “Murder the Truth” an in-depth exposé of the attack on freedom of the press as protected by the landmark Supreme Court decision “Sullivan v. The New York Times.” Also, Professor Michael Graetz a leading authority on tax politics and policy joins to discuss his book “The Power to Destroy: How the Antitax Movement Hijacked America.” Plus, our resident constitutional scholar, Bruce Fein, updates us on his latest efforts to push for the impeachment of Donald Trump.David Enrich is the business investigations editor for The New York Times. He writes about the intersection of law and business, including the power wielded by giant corporate law firms and the changing contours of the First Amendment and libel law. His latest book is titled Murder the Truth: Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful, an in-depth exposé of the broad campaign—orchestrated by elite Americans—to overturn sixty years of Supreme Court precedent, weaponize our speech laws, and silence dissent.When all the institutions are crushed by a dictator in the White House, it's only the people that can save the people.Ralph NaderThe interesting thing was that Fox, and these other right-wing outlets for years had been kind of banging the drum against New York Times v. Sullivan and against the protections that many journalists have come to count on. And then they get sued and their immediate fallback is to very happily cite New York Times v. Sullivan.David EnrichThese threats and these lawsuits have become an extremely popular weapon among everyone from the President down to mayors, city council members, local real estate development companies, on and on and on…And the direct result of that will be that powerful people, companies, organizations, institutions are going to be able to do bad things without anyone knowing about it.David EnrichPeople keep asking me what they can do, what they should do. And I think the answer is really to try and understand these issues. They're complicated, but they're also getting deliberately misframed and misrepresented often, especially on the right, but sometimes not on the right. And I think it's really important for people to understand the importance of New York Times v. Sullivan, and to understand the grave threats facing journalists, especially at the local level right now, and the consequences that could have for our democracy.David EnrichMichael Graetz is professor emeritus at Columbia Law School and Yale Law School and a leading authority on tax politics and policy. He served in the U.S. Treasury's Office of Tax Policy and is the author and coauthor of many books, including Death by a Thousand Cuts: The Fight over Taxing Inherited Wealth and The Burger Court and the Rise of the Judicial Right. His latest book is The Power to Destroy: How the Antitax Movement Hijacked America.I spent a lot of time asking people to name the most important political and social movements of the last half century. And no surprise, they named the civil rights movement, the women's movement, the LGBTQ movement, the Christian Evangelical movement, the MAGA movement lately, but no one ever mentioned the anti-tax movement. And unlike the other movements I've named, the anti-tax movement is really the only one that has not suffered a serious setback in the past half century.Michael GraetzThe anti-tax movement has always relied on a false dichotomy between “us” (those who pay taxes) and “them” (those who receive government benefits).Michael GraetzThe Democrats now don't want to tax 98% of the people and the Republicans don't want to tax 100% of the people and the question is: how do you get anywhere with those kinds of firm “no new taxes” pledges? And that's a problem. And I think it's a problem that the Democrats have fallen into basically based on the success of the Republicans antitax coalition.Michael GraetzYou're going to see individuals' budgets pinched because the federal government refuses to treat its budget with any degree of seriousness.Michael GraetzThe label they use to justify tax cuts for the rich and the corporate they call them the “job creators.” Well, that has not been proven at all.Ralph NaderBruce Fein is a Constitutional scholar and an expert on international law. Mr. Fein was Associate Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan and he is the author of Constitutional Peril: The Life and Death Struggle for Our Constitution and Democracy, and American Empire: Before the Fall.Certainly, the current Congress is not going to act without citizen involvement, pressure, clamoring that they do something to save the processes which are the heart and soul of our civilization as opposed to the law of the jungle.Bruce FeinNews 3/19/251. The AP reports that on Tuesday Israel broke the U.S.-brokered ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, launching airstrikes that have killed over 400 Palestinians. These strikes, which have killed mostly women and children, are described as “open-ended and expected to expand.” This new offensive began the same day Prime Minister Netanyahu was scheduled to appear in court to provide testimony in his corruption trial; according to Israeli broadcaster KAN News, Netanyahu used the surprise attack to annul this court date.2. This new offensive endangers the lives of some two dozen Israeli hostages still held by Hamas in Gaza. These hostages would have been released as part of the prisoner exchanges brokered through the ceasefire agreement. In order to dissuade further escalation, journalist Dimi Reider reports “Israeli hostage families are trying to make a human chain around Gaza to physically block a ground incursion.” This human chain includes prominent Israeli activist Einav Zangauker, whose son is still held in Gaza and who has made herself an implacable opponent of Netanyahu.3. On the home front, a new round of state-backed repression is underway, targeted at pro-Palestine activists on college and university campuses. The Mahmoud Khalil case has received perhaps the most attention and with good reason. Khalil is a legal permanent resident of the United States and is married to a U.S. citizen who is eight months pregnant. He has long been active in pro-Palestine organizing at the college, which White House officials have claimed make him a “threat to the foreign policy and national security interests of the United States.” The Trump administration has refused to honor Khalil's Constitutional rights – including refusing to let him meet with his lawyer – and has admitted that they are persecuting him on the basis of political speech, a clear-cut violation of the First Amendment. A White House official explicitly told the Free Press, “The allegation…is not that he was breaking the law.” In addition to Khalil however, Columbia has taken the opportunity to expel, suspend and revoke the degrees of 22 students involved in the Hind's Hall occupation last year, per the Middle East Eye. This raft of penalizations includes the expulsion of Grant Miner, President of UAW Local 2710, which represents thousands of Columbia student workers. Per the UAW, “the firing comes one day before contract negotiations were set to open with the University.” The timing of this expulsion is suspicious to say the least.4. Yet, even in the face of such repression, pro-Palestine campus activism perseveres. Democracy Now! reports that on March 14th, Harvard Law School students “overwhelmingly passed a referendum calling on Harvard to divest its more than $50 billion endowment from ‘weapons, surveillance technology, and other companies aiding violations of international humanitarian law, including Israel's genocide in Gaza and its ongoing illegal occupation of Palestine.'” The Harvard Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee adds that the referendum passed with approximately 73% of the vote, an unquestionably decisive margin. Even still, the university is unlikely to even consider adopting the resolution.5. The resilience of student activists in the face of state-backed repression highlights the fecklessness of elected Democrats. The political leadership of New York for example has not mobilized to defend Mahmoud Khalil from authoritarian overreach by the federal government. Even locally, none of the current mayoral hopefuls – a rather underwhelming lot including the comically corrupt incumbent Mayor Eric Adams and former Governor Andrew Cuomo, infamous for killing thousands of seniors via his Covid policies and for the pervasive culture of sexual harassment in his office – have forcefully spoken up for Khalil. That is except for Zohran Mamdani, the DSA-endorsed mayoral candidate steadily climbing in the polls thanks to his popular message and well-crafted political ads. His advocacy on behalf of Khalil seems to have won him the support of perhaps the most principled progressive in Congress, Rashida Tlaib, who likewise is leading the meager Congressional effort to pressure the administration to rescind the disappearance of Khalil.6. In light of their anemic response to Trump and Trumpism, Democratic discontent is reaching a boiling point. A flashpoint emerged last week when Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer opted not to fight the Republican budget proposal and vote for cloture instead of shutting down the government. Democratic voters were so incensed by this decision that Schumer was forced to postpone his book tour and the Democratic Party registered its lowest ever approval ratings, with just seven percent of voters saying they have a “very positive” view of the party. As this debacle unfolded, House Democrats were at a retreat in Leesburg, Virginia where AOC “slammed…[Schumer's]…decision to ‘completely roll over and give up on protecting the Constitution.'” One member told CNN Democrats in Leesburg were “so mad” that even centrists were “ready to write checks for AOC for Senate.” And Pass the Torch, the grassroots progressive group that called for President Biden withdraw from the 2024 campaign is now calling for Schumer to resign as minority leader, the Hill reports. In their statement, the group writes “[Schumer's] sole job is to fight MAGA's fascist takeover of our democracy — instead, he's directly enabling it. Americans desperately need a real opposition party to stand up to Trump.”7. In the early evening on Tuesday March 18th, Trump unlawfully dismissed the two remaining Democrats on the Federal Trade Commission, POLITICO reports. One Commissioner, Alvaro Bedoya, tweeted “The President just illegally fired me.” Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter was also ousted from her post. In her statement, she wrote that her dismissal violated “the plain language of a statute and clear Supreme Court precedent. Why? Because…[Trump] is afraid of what I'll tell the American people.” Trump similarly violated the law when he dismissed National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox who filed a lawsuit which prevailed in federal district court. POLITICO reports she returned to work last week. Biden's superstar FTC Chair Lina Khan, already ousted by Trump, commented “The @FTC must enforce the law without fear or favor. The administration's illegal attempt to fire Commissioners Slaughter & Bedoya is a disturbing sign that this FTC won't. It's a gift to corporate lawbreakers that squeeze American consumers, workers, and honest businesses.” On March 19th, Bedoya added “Don't worry…We are still commissioners. We're suing to make that clear for everyone.”8. Trump's radical deregulatory agenda could not come at a worse time. Amid a streak of horrific aviation accidents and incidents, it now appears that Elon Musk is seeking to permanently worm his way into the Federal Aviation Administration. Forbes reports that the Campaign Legal Center has filed a legal complaint with the Office of the Inspector General of the Transportation Department alleging that Musk may have violated conflict of interest laws through his “involvement with a deal between the Federal Aviation Administration and his own company Starlink.” Per the Washington Post, the FAA is “close to canceling” its existing $2.4 billion contract with Verizon in favor of working with Starlink, and according to the legal complaint, Musk “appears to have personally and substantially participated” in these negotiations. This matter will have to play out in court, but the risks are very real. As Representative Greg Casar put it, “Musk is trying to make our air traffic control system ‘dependent' on him by integrating his equipment, which has not gone through security and risk-management review. It's corruption. And it's dangerous.”9. In more Musk news, President Trump has announced that he will institute a new rule classifying any attack on Tesla dealers as domestic terrorism, Reuters reports. This comes in response to the peaceful, so-called “Tesla Takedown” protests, which urge participants to “Sell your Teslas, dump your stock, join the picket lines.” Any connection between the protests and isolated cases of vandalism against Teslas or Tesla dealerships is tenuous at most. Instead, this theatrical display of support for the auto manufacturer seems to be a response Tesla's declining stock value. Reuters reports “Tesla's market capitalization has more than halved since hitting an all-time high of $1.5 trillion on December 17, erasing most of the gains the stock made after Musk-backed Trump won the U.S. election in November.” It seems unlikely that invoking the iron fist of the state against peaceful protestors will do much to buoy Tesla's market position.10. Finally, in a humiliating bit of tragic irony, Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has long maintained a personal brand as a crusader against junk food, is being deployed by the Trump administration to boost the fast food chain Steak ‘n Shake. Ostensibly, the endorsement is predicated on the chain using beef tallow rather than seed oils to prepare their French fries – the company called it “RFK'ing the fries” – yet even that claim appears shaky. According to NBC, “the chain's move inspired some in the [Make America Healthy Again] world to look deeper… finding that [Steak ‘n Shake's] fries were precooked in seed oils.” Nevertheless, RFK's endorsement has been echoed by many others in Trump-world, including Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Kari Lake, Charlie Kirk, and others. NBC adds that in February, Tesla announced it had signed a deal to build charging stations at Steak 'n Shake locations. Funny how Musk's fingers seem to appear in every pie, or in this case grasping at every tallow French fry.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Newt talks with Kevin Czinger, lead inventor, Founder, and Executive Chairman of Czinger Vehicles and its parent company, Divergent Technologies about his recent visit to the Divergent 3D factory in Torrance, California. They discuss Czinger's impressive background, from his working-class roots in Ohio to his achievements in football, military service, and law. Czinger shares his journey from Yale Law School to becoming a Deputy US Attorney and later joining Goldman Sachs. He explains his transition to founding Coda Automotive and eventually Divergent Technologies, focusing on sustainable production systems. Their conversation highlights Divergent's innovative manufacturing process, which integrates AI, 3D printing, and robotics to create advanced, lightweight structures for various industries, including automotive and aerospace. Czinger also discusses the development of the Czinger 21C, the world's fastest street-legal hypercar, and the potential of Divergent's technology to revolutionize the aerospace and defense industries.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.