36 Burst results for "U.S. Supreme Court"

Fresh update on "u.s. supreme court" discussed on WTOP 24 Hour News

WTOP 24 Hour News

01:27 min | 58 min ago

Fresh update on "u.s. supreme court" discussed on WTOP 24 Hour News

"Sean Anderson Jocelyn chesson is our producer just ahead Three breaking stories we're following for you for a Supreme Court Justice Stephen breyer reportedly plans to retire I will the U.S. Senate deal with a new nominee to the high court On Capitol Hill I'm Mitchell Miller Our second breaking story the Federal Reserve reveals its direction on future interest rates We'll have a special report and the U.S. delivers a written response to Russia's demands over Ukraine News time two 31 Breaking news here on the TOP Supreme Court Justice Stephen breyer is reportedly retiring multiple reports say breyer will step down at the end of the current court term in June CNN reports The White House will have an announcement as early as tomorrow Breyer is the senior member of the high court's three member liberal wing President Biden will get his first chance to fill a vacancy and at least maintain the current ideological makeup of the court Prior leaving the court is expected to not have a dramatic impact on the rulings in most of the high profile cases he generally sided with the other liberals although he did side with the conservatives and moderates probably more often than the other liberal justices So we might see sort of a minor restructuring of the liberal wing of the court but on the big decisions swapping breyer for another liberal justice probably won't have a huge decisive impact That's Politico senior legal affairs reporter Josh gerstein So who might President Biden tap to replace justice breyer As a candidate in the summer of 2020 the president told CBS News he would not publish the names of possible contenders but he did say this.

Justice Stephen Breyer Sean Anderson Jocelyn Chesson Mitchell Miller Top Supreme Court Breyer U.S. Senate Federal Reserve Supreme Court Ukraine Russia CNN High Court Biden White House U.S. Josh Gerstein President Biden Cbs News
Justice Breyer to retire, giving Biden Supreme Court pick

AP News Radio

00:37 sec | 3 hrs ago

Justice Breyer to retire, giving Biden Supreme Court pick

"Justice justice justice justice Stephen Stephen Stephen Stephen Bryer Bryer Bryer Bryer is is is is giving giving giving giving president president president president Biden Biden Biden Biden in in in in opening opening opening opening to to to to make make make make his his his his first first first first Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court pick pick pick pick Bryer Bryer Bryer Bryer said said said said in in in in twenty twenty twenty twenty fifteen fifteen fifteen fifteen to to to to this this this this day day day day would would would would come come come come I I I I think think think think I I I I would would would would prefer prefer prefer prefer to to to to retire retire retire retire than than than than the the the the alternative alternative alternative alternative the the the the eighty eighty eighty eighty three three three three year year year year old old old old liberal liberal liberal liberal justice justice justice justice says says says says he's he's he's he's stepping stepping stepping stepping down down down down after after after after more more more more than than than than twenty twenty twenty twenty seven seven seven seven years years years years that that that that won't won't won't won't change change change change the the the the court's court's court's court's six six six six three three three three conservative conservative conservative conservative tilt tilt tilt tilt since since since since a a a a democratic democratic democratic democratic president president president president will will will will pick pick pick pick his his his his replacement replacement replacement replacement and and and and a a a a slim slim slim slim democratic democratic democratic democratic Senate Senate Senate Senate majority majority majority majority will will will will almost almost almost almost certainly certainly certainly certainly confirm confirm confirm confirm him him him him or or or or her her her her president president president president Biden Biden Biden Biden has has has has pledged pledged pledged pledged to to to to name name name name the the the the high high high high court's court's court's court's first first first first black black black black woman woman woman woman Sager Sager Sager Sager mag mag mag mag ani ani ani ani Washington Washington Washington Washington

Bryer Bryer Justice Justice Justice Justic Biden Biden Biden Biden Supreme Supreme Supreme Suprem Senate Senate Senate President President President High High High High Court Sager Sager Sager Sager Ani Ani Ani Ani Washington Washington
The Vaccine, Mask Mandates House of Cards Is Falling

The Larry Elder Show

01:32 min | 18 hrs ago

The Vaccine, Mask Mandates House of Cards Is Falling

"Let me just read you a few headlines, shall we? This is from world net daily. Government data referring to the Scottish government, government data show that free less likely to get COVID. First paragraph, data released by the Scottish government show people who have been vaccinated with two or three doses of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are more likely to become infected. Be hospitalized or die than people who are unvaccinated. This is from Reuters, headline. Dana study, Danish study finds face masks provide limited protection to wearer. This from Bloomberg. UK study fails to prove masks work in schools. New York magazine liberal, the science of masking kids at school remains uncertain. CBS, channel 42, this is in Alabama. Health experts warrant to stop wearing cloth masks. And New York Supreme Court judge has struck down, stricken down has stricken down. Yeah, I think it's right. Has stricken down. Democrat government mask mandate. Don't send me any emails telling me that I use bad grammar. And a whole bunch of parents, students in schools in Illinois have found lawsuits against the mask mandate. This is what's going

Scottish Government Covid New York Magazine Dana Reuters Bloomberg New York Supreme Court Democrat Government CBS UK Alabama Illinois
Supreme Court Will Consider Challenge to Affirmative Action in College Admissions

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

02:09 min | 1 d ago

Supreme Court Will Consider Challenge to Affirmative Action in College Admissions

"There's some very good news on affirmative action, the Supreme Court has decided to take a huge case. This is the Harvard and university of North Carolina to companion cases that deal with the same issue. And what is the issue? The issue is this. Should universities, this is particularly selective and elite universities, but it applies to a large number of university. Should universities be able to admit, black and Hispanic students who have vastly weaker academic preparation, vastly lower grades, vastly lower standardized test scores vastly lower extracurricular skills and should universities be nevertheless and we're talking here not just about private, but state universities. Should they be able to actively discriminate on the basis of race and admit week or black and Hispanic students while turning away stronger white and Asian American students, this has been going on for 40 years. And we're not talking about some people when they think about affirmative action they spout the kind of conventional nonsense about, well, we're talking about equally match candidates. And we're talking about someone giving someone a no. We're actually not talking about that. We're talking about people who are completely different in terms of their academic preparation, sometimes one cognitive gap of one, two, even three years. And I can say this is someone who has sort of witnessed the sufferer of action in action I saw it all around me a Dartmouth. And affirmative action was upheld in the bakke case. And then it was sort of reaffirmed in the case called grew versus bollinger, which was 2003. So for decades now, universities have been allowed to do this and universities do it under the pretext of diversity. We need a diverse student body. Now, this diversity business is a complete sham, because in fact, universities have become much less diverse. At least much less diverse than the one kind of diversity that matters in academia, namely diversity of interests and ideas and philosophies and thoughts. The kind of diversity that should matter in a college, that diversity is gone

Harvard And University Of Nort Supreme Court Dartmouth Bollinger
 EXPLAINER: Supreme Court takes up race in college admissions

AP News Radio

00:39 sec | 2 d ago

EXPLAINER: Supreme Court takes up race in college admissions

"Covert covert covert covert nineteen nineteen nineteen nineteen this this this this term term term term it's it's it's it's now now now now tacking tacking tacking tacking on on on on the the the the consideration consideration consideration consideration of of of of race race race race in in in in college college college college admissions admissions admissions admissions the the the the court court court court will will will will take take take take up up up up suits suits suits suits claiming claiming claiming claiming Harvard Harvard Harvard Harvard and and and and the the the the university university university university of of of of North North North North Carolina Carolina Carolina Carolina discriminate discriminate discriminate discriminate against against against against Asian Asian Asian Asian American American American American applicants applicants applicants applicants a a a a ruling ruling ruling ruling against against against against the the the the schools schools schools schools could could could could mean mean mean mean the the the the end end end end of of of of affirmative affirmative affirmative affirmative action action action action in in in in college college college college admissions admissions admissions admissions lower lower lower lower courts courts courts courts have have have have rejected rejected rejected rejected challenges challenges challenges challenges to to to to allowing allowing allowing allowing the the the the consideration consideration consideration consideration of of of of race race race race in in in in admissions admissions admissions admissions decisions decisions decisions decisions citing citing citing citing decades decades decades decades of of of of High High High High Court Court Court Court rulings rulings rulings rulings most most most most recently recently recently recently in in in in twenty twenty twenty twenty sixteen sixteen sixteen sixteen but but but but the the the the courts courts courts courts make make make make up up up up has has has has changed changed changed changed since since since since with with with with three three three three more more more more conservative conservative conservative conservative justices justices justices justices arguments arguments arguments arguments are are are are expected expected expected expected in in in in the the the the spring spring spring spring Sager Sager Sager Sager mag mag mag mag ani ani ani ani Washington Washington Washington Washington the the the the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court is is is is adding adding adding adding another another another another blockbuster blockbuster blockbuster blockbuster case case case case to to to to its its its its agenda agenda agenda agenda the the the the

Court Court Court Court Harvard Harvard Harvard Harvar University University Universi Carolina High High High High Court Cour Sager Sager Sager Sager Ani Ani Ani Ani Washington Washington Supreme Supreme Supreme Suprem
 UK court to rule on Assange bid to prevent US extradition

AP News Radio

00:44 sec | 2 d ago

UK court to rule on Assange bid to prevent US extradition

"Wikileaks wikileaks wikileaks wikileaks founder founder founder founder Julian Julian Julian Julian a a a a song song song song she's she's she's she's battle battle battle battle to to to to avoid avoid avoid avoid extradition extradition extradition extradition to to to to the the the the U. U. U. U. S. S. S. S. we'll we'll we'll we'll go go go go to to to to Britain's Britain's Britain's Britain's Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court after after after after he he he he was was was was granted granted granted granted the the the the right right right right to to to to appeal appeal appeal appeal a a a a lower lower lower lower court court court court ruling ruling ruling ruling the the the High High High Court Court Court last last last month month month overturned overturned overturned a a a lower lower lower court's court's court's decision decision decision saying saying saying the the the US US US promises promises promises well well well enough enough enough to to to guarantee guarantee guarantee a a a song song song she she she will will will be be be treated treated treated humanely humanely humanely in in in a a a US US US prison prison prison now now now the the the court court court has has has given given given the the the wikileaks wikileaks wikileaks founder founder founder permission permission permission to to to appeal appeal appeal that that that ruling ruling ruling to to to the the the Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court decisions decisions decisions the the the latest latest latest step step step in in in a a a song song song his his his long long long battle battle battle to to to avoid avoid avoid a a a trial trial trial on on on a a a series series series of of of charges charges charges related related related to to to wikileaks wikileaks wikileaks publication publication publication of of of classified classified classified documents documents documents more more more than than than a a a decade decade decade ago ago ago Charles Charles Charles Taylor Taylor Taylor this this this month month month London London London wikileaks wikileaks wikileaks founder founder founder Julian Julian Julian a a a song song song she's she's she's battle battle battle to to to avoid avoid avoid extradition extradition extradition to to to the the the U. U. U. S. S. S. we'll we'll we'll go go go to to to Britain's Britain's Britain's Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court after after after

Britain Julian Julian Julian Julian U. U. U. U. S. S. S. S. Supreme Supreme Supreme Suprem Wikileaks High High High Court Court Cou United States Court Court Court Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Charles Charles Charles Taylor London Julian Julian Julian U. S. S. S.
With Roe in doubt, states act on abortion limits, expansions

AP News Radio

01:01 min | 3 d ago

With Roe in doubt, states act on abortion limits, expansions

"Battles battles battles battles over over over over the the the the future future future future of of of of abortion abortion abortion abortion are are are are setting setting setting setting up up up up in in in in state state state state houses houses houses houses around around around around the the the the U. U. U. U. S. S. S. S. if if if if the the the the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court overturns overturns overturns overturns the the the the nineteen nineteen nineteen nineteen seventy seventy seventy seventy three three three three roe roe roe roe versus versus versus versus Wade Wade Wade Wade decision decision decision decision lawmakers lawmakers lawmakers lawmakers and and and and state state state state houses houses houses houses around around around around the the the the country country country country want want want want to to to to be be be be ready ready ready ready fifteen fifteen fifteen fifteen states states states states including including including including Vermont Vermont Vermont Vermont New New New New Jersey Jersey Jersey Jersey and and and and Michigan Michigan Michigan Michigan have have have have moved moved moved moved to to to to protect protect protect protect abortion abortion abortion abortion access access access access California California California California lawmakers lawmakers lawmakers lawmakers are are are are considering considering considering considering plans plans plans plans to to to to become become become become a a a a sanctuary sanctuary sanctuary sanctuary state state state state for for for for those those those those seeking seeking seeking seeking reproductive reproductive reproductive reproductive care care care care meanwhile meanwhile meanwhile meanwhile more more more more than than than than twenty twenty twenty twenty states states states states already already already already have have have have laws laws laws laws on on on on the the the the books books books books that that that that would would would would dramatically dramatically dramatically dramatically restrict restrict restrict restrict abortion abortion abortion abortion and and and and are are are are considering considering considering considering new new new new bands bands bands bands at at at at the the the the High High High High Court Court Court Court allows allows allows allows it it it it Arizona Arizona Arizona Arizona Florida Florida Florida Florida and and and and West West West West Virginia Virginia Virginia Virginia way way way way bans bans bans bans on on on on the the the the procedure procedure procedure procedure after after after after fifteen fifteen fifteen fifteen weeks weeks weeks weeks similar similar similar similar to to to to the the the the Mississippi Mississippi Mississippi Mississippi law law law law under under under under consideration consideration consideration consideration abortion abortion abortion abortion opponents opponents opponents opponents like like like like their their their their chances chances chances chances row row row row is is is is not not not not settled settled settled settled law law law law Jeannie Jeannie Jeannie Jeannie Manzini Manzini Manzini Manzini as as as as the the the the president president president president of of of of March March March March for for for for life life life life she she she she spoke spoke spoke spoke at at at at the the the the rally rally rally rally in in in in Washington Washington Washington Washington on on on on Friday Friday Friday Friday Kristin Kristin Kristin Kristin Ford Ford Ford Ford with with with with NARAL NARAL NARAL NARAL pro pro pro pro choice choice choice choice America America America America says says says says this this this this could could could could be be be be a a a a really really really really really really really really dramatic dramatic dramatic dramatic year year year year in in in in terms terms terms terms of of of of people's people's people's people's ability ability ability ability to to to to access access access access abortion abortion abortion abortion care care care care and and and and to to to to decide decide decide decide if if if if when when when when and and and and how how how how they they they they become become become become apparent apparent apparent apparent Jennifer Jennifer Jennifer Jennifer king king king king Washington Washington Washington Washington

Vermont Michigan U. U. U. U. S. S. S. S. Supreme Supreme Supreme Suprem Roe Roe Roe Roe Wade Wade Wade Wade California New New Jersey Jersey Jersey Jersey Arizona Florida High High High High Court Cour West West West Virginia New New Mississippi Mississippi Mississippi Jeannie Jeannie Jeannie Jeanni Ford Washington
Hosea Initiative's Terry Beatley on the Battle for the Unborn

America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

01:22 min | 4 d ago

Hosea Initiative's Terry Beatley on the Battle for the Unborn

"We are delighted to have in studio. None other than Terry beatley, Terry, welcome back to America first. Hey Sebastian, I'm glad I'm back on. Thank you. So are you excited with this case in front of the Supreme Court with roe V wade potentially being overturned? I know we can't tempt fate, but we have faith. So tell us about how you are feeling right now in the battle for the unborn. I'm very encouraged. I'm super encouraged. I mean, we do have the chance of overturning roe V wade and all that means is the issue finally comes back to the states. This is important. This is not banning abortion in America because the Supreme Court can't do that. It just does what should happen in this nation. The decision goes back to the states because we are republic of states. And then what happens? And then what happens is I call it the battle for education. And here's the beautiful thing is the abortion issue can not maintain status quo in debating it, because logic, because truth, we can shine lighten all the dark places. So abortion will not stand, but at least it's going to be, it'll collapse due to education and enlightenment when people understand that we've been duped from the

Terry Beatley Roe V Wade Supreme Court Sebastian America Terry
National Music Publishers Association's David Israelite on the Precursor to the Fight for Election Integrity

The Doug Collins Podcast

01:36 min | 5 d ago

National Music Publishers Association's David Israelite on the Precursor to the Fight for Election Integrity

"It's interesting for me when you wanted to get into politics and I know you started in Missouri kit Bond. I mean, there's these names coming up from the past. Interestingly enough, and I like to start here because you came through the 2000 election. That's the Bush V gore cycle. That was the really, do you look back now even a little bit now with everything going on and say in now you can look back on it and say, here's the precursor of some of what we're reaping now. It's a great question. The world looks very different, I think, than it did when I was kind of doing politics as a job. I think the country has changed quite a bit. The parties have changed quite a bit. And even though it's not my career anymore, I feel like kind of like that retired athlete that stands on the sideline and watches the current athletes and talks about the good old days of when I used to be on the field. Recognizing, of course, that no one wants to hear your stories about when you used to be playing. Yeah, I think the 2000 election was in many ways a really turning point for the country, especially when you look now at kind of how people are reacting to results of presidential elections. I think unique and different, it was one state. It was truly in dispute as to what happened and obviously it was mostly illegal proceeding that ended up in the Supreme Court. And I think what was kind of remarkable about that is that, you know, once it was decided the country kind of accepted it and moved on.

Bush V Gore Missouri Supreme Court
The Larger Significance of the NPR-Sotomayor Story

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

02:46 min | 5 d ago

The Larger Significance of the NPR-Sotomayor Story

"I'd like to talk about the larger significance of this NPR story about the Supreme Court and masking. I wasn't going to cover the story. I thought it was kind of dumb. But Debbie's like, no, people are talking about it. You should cover it, and I want to do it in a way that draws out. What's really going on here? Because you see the essence of fake news. And it started out with Nina totenberg, the kind of longtime court reporter of NPR. Saying the following, she said that according to sources at the court Sotomayor did not feel safe in proximity to people who were not masked. Nina told mug reported that justice Roberts, understanding that, quote, in some form as the other justices to mask up. And then says tort, they all did, except Gorsuch, who as it happens sits next to Sotomayor on the bench, is continued refusal to do so has meant that Sotomayor has not attended the justice weekly conference in person, joining by telephone. Now, this article was just picked up because it suggested this kind of, wow, even at the Supreme Court, you've got all this insider Garfield going on over masking. So right away, CNBC was all over at MSNBC, CNN, and then of course all the pundits began to weigh in. He has made a Hassan. Why is it that the public figures on the right who claim to be pious Christians and believers and morality and decency turn out to be awful awful people? So you got the statement and then all the speculations on top of the statement presuming, of course, the statement to be true. And then justice Roberts put out a statement basically saying I never asked the other justices to be masked, boom. And after that, this was even more unprecedented. There was a statement that came out from Sotomayor and Gorsuch. So what are my says? I never asked that gore such be masked. I never, I never made that requirement. Gorsuch said I never heard anything of this sort from the chief justice has never been any such rule. The whole story was made up. The whole story was lies. Now, the killer. Here's a Nina totenberg tweeting after all this after three statements think of the how unusual it is for three justices of the court to come out and directly dispute all of them, saying the same thing and say meeting Nina totenberg's reporting as follows. You think she'd be like eating crow, right? No. Quote, NPR stands by my reporting. In other words, the three justices are liars. Either that, or some analysts have tried to cover her by saying that in an original report, she said that the judge Roberts quote in some form as the justice system makeup as though in some form means he didn't really. He just sort of implied

Gorsuch Nina Totenberg Sotomayor Justice Roberts Supreme Court NPR Debbie Nina Garfield Cnbc Msnbc Hassan CNN Gore Roberts
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

03:51 min | 5 d ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

"I'm Debbie Elliott in orange beach Alabama And I'm a Martinez and Culver City California The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a request by abortion providers to intervene against a Texas law restricting abortion rights Abortion has been legal nationwide for nearly 5 decades and almost from the beginning there's been a movement of people trying to change that Today organizers of the anti abortion march for life in Washington D.C. are hopeful that they're closer than ever to reversing the roe V wade decision that legalize a procedure in 1973 Has NPR's Sarah mccammond reports activists on both sides of the issue say a high court ruling on a Mississippi law expected later this year will dramatically reshape abortion rights policy Each year in late January activists from around the country who want abortion to be illegal come to Washington D.C. to march often embracing cold temperatures to the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court Organizers of today's march for life hope it will be the last year before the court reverses itself I'm very hopeful about the dab's case and hopeful that the Supreme Court will make the decision to return the question of abortion to the states Jeanne Mancini is president of the march for life She's referring to a case challenging Mississippi's ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy which is currently before the Supreme Court Upholding that law would overturn decades of abortion rights precedent Mancini's group has been hosting the march since 1974 The year after the roe V wade decision legalized abortion nationwide She cautions that though she's hopeful she doesn't expect the status of abortion rights to change overnight regardless of how the court rules If they do go so far as to overturn row what that does is return the question to different states so that they have the right to enact what their constituents want It's not making abortion illegal in the United States And I think that that really fear mongering to spread that But for people living in places with conservative leaning state legislatures the end of roe V wade could mean a swift end to abortion access Iris Harvey president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of greater Ohio points to a series of new abortion restrictions in her state Our lawmakers have recently ramped up their attacks and they've been doing it for at least the last 5 or ten years but they've increased it It's likely that this will be our last anniversary that we celebrate for row Ohio State lawmakers are currently considering what's known as a trigger ban which would prohibit nearly all abortions if roe is overturned It would completely ban access to abortion in Ohio right away So we're right at that cusp and are very concerned about it An analysis by the gut marketer institute which supports abortion rights estimates that without row roughly two dozen states would quickly move to ban most or all abortions because of similar laws Already conservative state leaders are laying the groundwork for that The Supreme Court has allowed a Texas law banning most abortions after about 6 weeks of pregnancy to remain in effect since September During a press conference this week previewing today's march for life Kentucky attorney general Daniel Cameron expressed admiration for that law I appreciate what Texas has tried to do And I know our folks here in our General Assembly are watching with bated breath to see how that plays out and how it plays out and adopt An NPR PBS NewsHour marist poll last year found that most Americans including a majority of Republicans opposed the Texas law But many Republicans state leaders say they're ready to support similar legislation as soon as they get the green light from the U.S. Supreme Court Sarah mccammond NVR news Washington Has.

roe V wade Washington D.C. U.S. Supreme Court Debbie Elliott Sarah mccammond Jeanne Mancini Mississippi orange beach Culver City Martinez Iris Harvey Planned Parenthood of greater Texas NPR Alabama Mancini California gut marketer institute Ohio Daniel Cameron
Nation's largest abortion protest could be last under Roe

AP News Radio

00:49 sec | 5 d ago

Nation's largest abortion protest could be last under Roe

"Abortion abortion abortion abortion opponents opponents opponents opponents are are are are marching marching marching marching in in in in Washington Washington Washington Washington today today today today but but but but this this this this year's year's year's year's March March March March for for for for life life life life appears appears appears appears different different different different than than than than years years years years past past past past in in in past past past years years years as as as the the the March March March took took took place place place on on on the the the national national national mall mall mall on on on the the the anniversary anniversary anniversary of of of roe roe roe versus versus versus Wade Wade Wade the the the U. U. U. S. S. S. Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court upheld upheld upheld the the the abortion abortion abortion rights rights rights decision decision decision as as as the the the law law law of of of the the the land land land but but but in in in twenty twenty twenty twenty twenty twenty two two two the the the conservative conservative conservative majority majority majority court court court is is is signaling signaling signaling it it it will will will allow allow allow states states states to to to impose impose impose tighter tighter tighter abortion abortion abortion restrictions restrictions restrictions and and and could could could even even even overturn overturn overturn the the the landmark landmark landmark nineteen nineteen nineteen seventy seventy seventy three three three decision decision decision turnout turnout turnout for for for this this this year's year's year's March March March is is is likely likely likely smaller smaller smaller than than than years years years past past past because because because of of of the the the pandemic pandemic pandemic and and and some some some saying saying saying they they they will will will come come come to to to Washington Washington Washington because because because of of of its its its mask mask mask and and and indoor indoor indoor vaccine vaccine vaccine requirements requirements requirements hi hi hi Jackie Jackie Jackie Quinn Quinn Quinn

Washington National National National Mal Wade Wade Wade U. U. U. S. S. S. Supreme Supr Jackie Jackie Jackie Quinn Qui
Georgia DA Asks for Special Grand Jury in Election Probe Against Trump

Mark Levin

01:42 min | 5 d ago

Georgia DA Asks for Special Grand Jury in Election Probe Against Trump

"The Supreme Court and basic comedy CO MIT Y has created a disaster in our country which is the war against Donald Trump A Manhattan DA going after Donald Trump You have an attorney general of New York going after Donald Trump These are elected Marxist Democrats And now you have a Georgia DA as for a special grand jury to go after Donald Trump And this is a Georgia DA with ties to of course Stacey Abrams The true winner of the governorship of Georgia chastes Of course she never comes under any criticism for undermining our electoral system No She's unbelievable The associated depressed Atlanta the Georgia prosecutor looking into possible attempts to interfere in the 2020 general election By former president Donald Trump and others is as for a special grand jury to aid the investigation Fulton county DA fanny Willis The faster Sent a letter to Fulton county superior court chief judge Christopher brash here See all these Democrat areas But the Republicans they're scared No pushback Asking him to impanel a special grand jury She wrote in a letter that her office has received information indicating a reasonable probability That the state of Georgia's administration of elections in 2020 including the state's election of the president of the United States was subject to possible criminal disruptions

Donald Trump Georgia Basic Comedy Co Mit Stacey Abrams Da Fanny Willis Supreme Court Manhattan Fulton County Superior Court Judge Christopher Brash New York Fulton County Atlanta United States
Court bolsters defendant's right to cross-examine witnesses

AP News Radio

00:43 sec | 5 d ago

Court bolsters defendant's right to cross-examine witnesses

"Hi hi hi hi Mike Mike Mike Mike Rossi Rossi Rossi Rossi a a a a reporting reporting reporting reporting the the the the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court bolsters bolsters bolsters bolsters the the the the defendant's defendant's defendant's defendant's right right right right to to to to cross cross cross cross examine examine examine examine witnesses witnesses witnesses witnesses the the the the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court on on on on Thursday Thursday Thursday Thursday affirmed affirmed affirmed affirmed a a a a criminal criminal criminal criminal defendant's defendant's defendant's defendant's right right right right to to to to cross cross cross cross examine examine examine examine prosecution prosecution prosecution prosecution witnesses witnesses witnesses witnesses in in in in the the the the eight eight eight eight one one one one ruling ruling ruling ruling the the the the court court court court found found found found New New New New York York York York defendant defendant defendant defendant Daryll Daryll Daryll Daryll Hemphill's Hemphill's Hemphill's Hemphill's constitutional constitutional constitutional constitutional rights rights rights rights were were were were violated violated violated violated what what what what a a a a judge judge judge judge allowed allowed allowed allowed jurors jurors jurors jurors to to to to read read read read testimony testimony testimony testimony from from from from another another another another man man man man who who who who was was was was unavailable unavailable unavailable unavailable at at at at the the the the trial trial trial trial which which which which prosecutors prosecutors prosecutors prosecutors used used used used to to to to undermine undermine undermine undermine him him him him pills pills pills pills defense defense defense defense Hemphill Hemphill Hemphill Hemphill argued argued argued argued it it it it was was was was the the the the other other other other man man man man Nicholas Nicholas Nicholas Nicholas Morris Morris Morris Morris who who who who fired fired fired fired a a a a hand hand hand hand gun gun gun gun who who who who stray stray stray stray bullet bullet bullet bullet struck struck struck struck and and and and killed killed killed killed a a a a two two two two year year year year old old old old boy boy boy boy in in in in the the the the Bronx Bronx Bronx Bronx on on on on Easter Easter Easter Easter Sunday Sunday Sunday Sunday in in in in two two two two thousand thousand thousand thousand six six six six Hemphill Hemphill Hemphill Hemphill was was was was convicted convicted convicted convicted of of of of killing killing killing killing the the the the child child child child while while while while Morris Morris Morris Morris pleaded pleaded pleaded pleaded guilty guilty guilty guilty to to to to a a a a lesser lesser lesser lesser charge charge charge charge might might might might cross cross cross cross yet yet yet yet Washington Washington Washington Washington

Supreme Supreme Supreme Suprem Hemphill Mike Mike Mike Mike Rossi Ross Court Court Court Court New New New New York York York Daryll Daryll Daryll Daryll He Hemphill Hemphill Hemphill Hem Nicholas Nicholas Nicholas Nic Bronx Bronx Bronx Bronx Morris Morris Morris Morris Washington
Supreme Court won't speed challenge to Texas abortion limits

AP News Radio

00:41 sec | 5 d ago

Supreme Court won't speed challenge to Texas abortion limits

"Hi hi hi hi Mike Mike Mike Mike Ross Ross Ross Ross you're you're you're you're reporting reporting reporting reporting the the the the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court won't won't won't won't speed speed speed speed a a a a challenge challenge challenge challenge to to to to Texas Texas Texas Texas abortion abortion abortion abortion limits limits limits limits abortion abortion abortion abortion providers providers providers providers in in in in Texas Texas Texas Texas were were were were dealt dealt dealt dealt a a a a blow blow blow blow Thursday Thursday Thursday Thursday as as as as the the the the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court declined declined declined declined to to to to order order order order a a a a speed speed speed speed up up up up of of of of an an an an ongoing ongoing ongoing ongoing case case case case over over over over the the the the Texas Texas Texas Texas ban ban ban ban on on on on most most most most abortions abortions abortions abortions over over over over descents descents descents descents of of of of the the the the three three three three liberal liberal liberal liberal justices justices justices justices the the the the high high high high court court court court declines declines declines declines to to to to order order order order a a a a federal federal federal federal appeals appeals appeals appeals court court court court to to to to return return return return the the the the case case case case to to to to a a a a federal federal federal federal judge judge judge judge who who who who would would would would put put put put the the the the Texas Texas Texas Texas law law law law on on on on temporary temporary temporary temporary hold hold hold hold in in in in October October October October as as as as a a a a result result result result the the the the Texas Texas Texas Texas law law law law stays stays stays stays in in in in effect effect effect effect for for for for now now now now another another another another case case case case before before before before the the the the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court over over over over Mississippi Mississippi Mississippi Mississippi abortion abortion abortion abortion restrictions restrictions restrictions restrictions could could could could overturn overturn overturn overturn the the the the landmark landmark landmark landmark roe roe roe roe V. V. V. V. Wade Wade Wade Wade decision decision decision decision the the the the ruling ruling ruling ruling in in in in that that that that case case case case is is is is expected expected expected expected by by by by late late late late June June June June Mike Mike Mike Mike Rossio Rossio Rossio Rossio Washington Washington Washington Washington

Texas Supreme Supreme Supreme Suprem Mike Mike Mike Mike Ross Ross Court Court Court Court Mississippi Roe Roe Roe Roe V. V. V. V. Wa Mike Mike Mike Mike Rossio Ros Washington
Jan. 6 committee requests interview with Ivanka Trump

AP News Radio

00:47 sec | 6 d ago

Jan. 6 committee requests interview with Ivanka Trump

"The the the the house house house house panel panel panel panel investigating investigating investigating investigating the the the the capital capital capital capital insurrection insurrection insurrection insurrection wants wants wants wants to to to to speak speak speak speak with with with with another another another another trump trump trump trump the the the the committee's committee's committee's committee's asking asking asking asking Ivanka Ivanka Ivanka Ivanka trump trump trump trump to to to to voluntarily voluntarily voluntarily voluntarily cooperate cooperate cooperate cooperate by by by by talking talking talking talking about about about about her her her her actions actions actions actions during during during during the the the the insurrection insurrection insurrection insurrection by by by by Donald Donald Donald Donald trump's trump's trump's trump's backers backers backers backers panel panel panel panel chair chair chair chair Bennie Bennie Bennie Bennie Thompson Thompson Thompson Thompson says says says says she she she she was was was was in in in in direct direct direct direct contact contact contact contact with with with with their their their their father father father father during during during during key key key key moments moments moments moments the the the the committee committee committee committee wants wants wants wants to to to to know know know know what what what what she she she she knew knew knew knew about about about about his his his his efforts efforts efforts efforts to to to to pressure pressure pressure pressure than than than than vice vice vice vice president president president president pence pence pence pence to to to to rejected rejected rejected rejected the the the the election election election election results results results results and and and and about about about about any any any any concerns concerns concerns concerns you you you you may may may may have have have have heard heard heard heard from from from from pence's pence's pence's pence's staff staff staff staff lawmakers lawmakers lawmakers lawmakers and and and and others others others others the the the the panel panel panel panel cites cites cites cites testimony testimony testimony testimony that that that that amount amount amount amount could could could could trump trump trump trump urged urged urged urged her her her her father father father father to to to to stem stem stem stem the the the the violence violence violence violence the the the the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court gave gave gave gave the the the the committee committee committee committee a a a a major major major major win win win win last last last last night night night night by by by by rejecting rejecting rejecting rejecting Donald Donald Donald Donald trump's trump's trump's trump's bid bid bid bid to to to to block block block block release release release release of of of of White White White White House House House House records records records records it'd it'd it'd it'd been been been been seeking seeking seeking seeking Sager Sager Sager Sager mag mag mag mag ani ani ani ani Washington Washington Washington Washington

House House House House Capital Capital Capital Capita Donald Donald Donald Donald Tr Ivanka Ivanka Ivanka Ivanka Tr Committee Committee Committee Donald Trump Pence Chair Chair Bennie Bennie Benn Thompson Thompson Thompson Supreme Supreme Supreme Suprem White White White White House Sager Sager Ani Ani Ani Ani Washington Washington
NPR Stands by Report as Three SCOTUS Justices Refute Gorsuch-Sotomayor Feud

Mike Gallagher Podcast

01:22 min | 6 d ago

NPR Stands by Report as Three SCOTUS Justices Refute Gorsuch-Sotomayor Feud

"Do you see how NPR lied about the Supreme Court? NPR's Nina totenberg reported that justice Sotomayor is having to be forced to work remotely all because of the stubbornness of justice Gorsuch. Sotomayor, according to the report, has asked Gorsuch to put his mask on as the Supreme Court is in session. He is reportedly refusing forcing the. Immunocompromised Sonia Sotomayor to work from home. That's according to NPR. Turns out, they're all denied. All of the parties involved said it's absolutely false. It's a blatant lie. So to my or denied it, Gorsuch dyed it, denied it, they're all denying it. They're saying it isn't true. What an NPR do? Double down. They stand by their reporter, because after all, Nina totenberg has been around for a hundred years and she wouldn't make something like that up. Another reason to hate the mainstream media and to despise the fact that you and I help fund

Gorsuch NPR Nina Totenberg Sonia Sotomayor Supreme Court Sotomayor
Starbucks nixes vaccine mandate after Supreme Court ruling

AP News Radio

00:46 sec | Last week

Starbucks nixes vaccine mandate after Supreme Court ruling

"Starbucks Starbucks Starbucks Starbucks is is is is reversing reversing reversing reversing a a a a policy policy policy policy announced announced announced announced earlier earlier earlier earlier this this this this month month month month that that that that required required required required U. U. U. U. S. S. S. S. workers workers workers workers to to to to be be be be vaccinated vaccinated vaccinated vaccinated against against against against Kobe Kobe Kobe Kobe nineteen nineteen nineteen nineteen the the the the coffee coffee coffee coffee giant giant giant giant switch switch switch switch comes comes comes comes after after after after the the the the Supreme Supreme Supreme Supreme Court Court Court Court last last last last week week week week rejected rejected rejected rejected the the the the Biden Biden Biden Biden ministrations ministrations ministrations ministrations plan plan plan plan to to to to require require require require vaccines vaccines vaccines vaccines that that that that were were were were testing testing testing testing and and and and companies companies companies companies with with with with more more more more than than than than one one one one hundred hundred hundred hundred workers workers workers workers Starbucks Starbucks Starbucks Starbucks says says says says it it it it will will will will comply comply comply comply many many many many other other other other big big big big companies companies companies companies like like like like target target target target have have have have not not not not said said said said what what what what they they they they will will will will do do do do Starbucks Starbucks Starbucks Starbucks says says says says eat eat eat eat still still still still strongly strongly strongly strongly encourages encourages encourages encourages vaccinations vaccinations vaccinations vaccinations and and and and boosters boosters boosters boosters and and and and that that that that the the the the vast vast vast vast majority majority majority majority of of of of its its its its two two two two hundred hundred hundred hundred twenty twenty twenty twenty eight eight eight eight thousand thousand thousand thousand US US US US workers workers workers workers are are are are fully fully fully fully vaccinated vaccinated vaccinated vaccinated it's it's it's it's now now now now telling telling telling telling them them them them to to to to wear wear wear wear at at at at medical medical medical medical grade grade grade grade surgical surgical surgical surgical masks masks masks masks to to to to work work work work instead instead instead instead of of of of cloth cloth cloth cloth masks masks masks masks Sager Sager Sager Sager Meg Meg Meg Meg Downie Downie Downie Downie Washington Washington Washington Washington

Starbucks U. U. U. U. S. S. S. S. Kobe Kobe Kobe Kobe Supreme Supreme Supreme Suprem Biden Biden Biden Biden United States Sager Sager Sager Meg Meg Meg Meg Downie Downie Washington
John Zmirak: We Are Fighting Off a Public Health Dictatorship

The Eric Metaxas Show

01:26 min | Last week

John Zmirak: We Are Fighting Off a Public Health Dictatorship

"It. Obviously, Donald Trump and Franklin Graham people that I would generally agree with on many things, they are saying people should get the vaccine. Of course, they're not in favor of vaccine mandates. But that's kind of where we are right now. Thankfully, the Supreme Court struck down Biden's outrageous overreach, trying to get every company in America that has a hundred and more employees mandate the vaccine. I don't know what's what's the biggest news. You know, because people say, it's so great that it was struck down then I think to myself, the idea that it had to be struck down. The idea that it was floated by this administration is just astonishing to me. Yeah, we are fighting off the imposition of a public health dictatorship. And here's the sort of logic point, a little chunk of logic, I think you should hurl in people's faces. Currently the law of the land is that privacy is such a sacred American right that a woman can abort her 9 month fetus at will. But if she wants to eat at TGI Fridays, she has to show the hostess her vaccine passport. Riddle be that Batman. It's simply

Franklin Graham Donald Trump Biden Supreme Court America Riddle Batman
Why the Government's Place Is Not in Our Life's Choices

The Larry Elder Show

01:40 min | Last week

Why the Government's Place Is Not in Our Life's Choices

"Look, I never thought I'd be living in a country where government could force every man, woman and child. To purchase healthcare insurance, whether they wanted it, whether they needed it, whether they could afford it. But the Supreme Court ruled that the government had the power to do that. And I was on the air, some 30 years ago. When California became the first state to ban cigarette smoking, in bars and restaurants. Now I've never smoked cigarettes except for the time I was 13 years old, almost threw up, which is why I never did it again. Don't like it on my clothes and like it in my hair. But my dad ran a restaurant, and he had ashtrays everywhere. And somehow, some way people smoked. And those who didn't survived. Those plenty of ventilation in the little bar that my dad owned little cafe my dad owned. And I said, then and I say now. Just because you don't smoke, just because you don't like it. Just because you think it's crude. Does that give the government? The right, the power of the ability to say to a restaurant owner, who may smoke, who may have a staff of smokes, who may have clientele, who smoke, we're not going to let you smoke in your own restaurant. And I got hammered. People called up and said, oh, how dare you? I hate smoking. That's not the issue. We're talking about freedom. And I said, if you allow this, what can't the government do?

Supreme Court California Government
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

03:00 min | 2 months ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"Before the U.S. Supreme Court is whether that's indeed so or whether that it's either just governments each of the government can engage in under any circumstances or perhaps whether more specifically there's just a tradition of government bodies being able to censure their own members As a disciplinary action and that that makes it quite different from situations where there are students or members of the bar or doctors being censured by administrative boards What were the main concerns that justice's had Well there were a couple One was that they were skeptical that just the label censure is really that significant here They pointed out that of course the government can speak out in all sorts of ways including about particular people especially in the context of a political fight among elected officials So they were skeptical that there is really a sharp divide between censure and ordinary government speech Again at least when it comes to speech about government officials The other concern that they had is just there's a pretty long-standing tradition of government bodies being able to center their own numbers Houses of Congress are entitled to and often do their own members And sometimes they do so for the members speech and the justices care a lot about tradition occasionally they do invalidate long-standing traditions but they're quite hesitant to do so Both liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor and conservative justice Samuel lito said this was an easy case on censure Does that tell you where the court is going Yeah it sounded from the argument that the justices would reverse the 5th circuit and say that this kind of political censure is basically immune from First Amendment scrutiny The interesting question is how broad the opinion will be So for example you can imagine an opinion that says well any kind of centuries just government speech in the government is entitled to say where it was That would suggest that the bar could censure a lawyer simply because it doesn't like his politics or that the government is employer Let's say university could formally censure a faculty member for the faculty members of research let's say That would be quite a broad ruling and might unduly interfere with First Amendment rights in some situations because in many contexts the law does recognize that sensual formal reprimand is a form of disciplinary form of employment action That's not quite the same of course is firing or demotion but that's in that same category Or you could decide in a narrower theory which is simply that this is a form of government speech that has long been recognized as within government power precisely because its politicians who are fighting it out with each other and all of them have political power And as a result it should be left to the political process Thanks Eugene That's professor Eugene volley of UCLA law school Coming up next the Supreme Court signals it will strike down New York's gun control law I'm June gros and you're listening to Bloomberg When was the last time Feel the freshness this holiday season and close its.

Samuel lito U.S. Supreme Court Sonia Sotomayor Congress government Eugene volley Eugene UCLA Supreme Court gros New York Bloomberg
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Rage for Justice Report

Rage for Justice Report

01:56 min | 2 months ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Rage for Justice Report

"That simple. I got some questions when I put out an email about this. What's so important about people with HIV getting access? Okay, they should be entitled to, but just pragmatically. Well, HIV is very different than many other illnesses because why it's uncured. It's an autoimmune disease that is uncured. And as a result, the body is constantly adapting to medications given to treat it. And because of that, you need a quick response from new medication and require the interactions of pharmacists and the consultations. And access locally quickly to pharmacies. And of course, with the mail order program, which may work if you're just taking a. Drug for your stomach ulcer, for example, does not work for the specialty medications for folks that need quick access to medications, and need access to pharmacists. Is there a privacy limit to? There's a big privacy element. Yeah, I mean, obviously, folks that have HIV because of the stigma unfortunately still attached to the illness, don't often disclose their illness to their roommates or workmates, and what happens when you get these mail order deliveries, all of a sudden, there's a large package that is clearly medication and you look at this person. I didn't even know you were sick, what's going on here? So it does raise all these issues about how folks with HIV may be outed and there's a lot of studies that show that that fear of their privacy violations leads to problems with adhering to medications. Great result, great work. We're really proud of this. Thank you so much for joining us. And thank you so much for fighting this Goliath and winning. Yeah, my pleasure. For listeners who want to learn more about what Jerry's doing and what the CVS case is about and go to consumer watchdog dot org. If you like what you heard, download this podcast from SoundCloud, Spotify, stitcher, the iTunes store, any place you get podcasts, you can get this great for justice report. Thanks for listening..

HIV CVS Jerry iTunes store
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Rage for Justice Report

Rage for Justice Report

05:32 min | 2 months ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Rage for Justice Report

"Thanks for joining us this week on the rage for justice report. Consumer watched up. I'm your host Jamie court president of consumer watchdog. Today we're joined by Jerry flanagan litigation director, who is also someone who just won a victory at the Supreme Court, the United States Supreme Court. Thanks for joining us, Jerry. Happy to be here. Now this was an interesting victory. It was a surprise victory. So why don't you tell folks about it? Right. So this is a case that we won at the 9th circuit unanimously. So great news only to be rewarded by a petition from CBS, which is the company on the other side. The pharmacy pharmacy chain that owns also. Well, the largest corporations in the world, right? They own Aetna. It's a pharmacy benefit manager. It has a annual revenue of $247 billion. And they bragged that most of it's from the federal government. So we got this great victory the 9th circuit only did be rewarded by a petition from CVS to the U.S. Supreme Court looking for review. And we thought, oh, geez. Well, luckily, those don't get granted very often, about 4% of the time. Well, on July 2nd, we get news at the U.S. Supreme Court had accepted the petition. It was one of the 4% of cases of the United States Supreme Court decided to hear. So at that point, we had a really gear up and get ready to write a big brief and prepare for oral argument the U.S. Supreme Court. And long story short, we wrote that brief, it's an outstanding brief. I was in the process of getting ready to do oral argument on December 7th, the 70th anniversary of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, only to get out of the blue last week, a notice that says that CDS has decided to fall on its own sword and give up its appeal to the United States Supreme Court. So we win, meaning the 9th circuit decision wins. Now the downside of that is that I have to cancel my airfare and hotel in D.C. because I won't be arguing from the U.S. Supreme Court, but a very, very good outcome from our client for our clients. And that is a win in my book. Yeah. Wins a win. And this was a case that was about people with HIV who were not able to go in as we all are otherwise to a pharmacy and get their special HIV medications from a pharmacist. And you argued in the initial case that that was basically a disability discrimination because people with HIV should have the same rights as everyone else. So what happened? They got CVS spooked at the level of the Supreme Court. I mean, imagine your brief was very good..

U.S. Supreme Court Jamie court Jerry flanagan Aetna Jerry CBS CVS federal government United States Pearl Harbor HIV D.C.
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on WABE 90.1 FM

WABE 90.1 FM

03:27 min | 3 months ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on WABE 90.1 FM

"This is here and now another battle over abortion is unfolding in Texas today after a federal judge temporarily paused the state's new 6 week abortion ban The state has already said it will appeal that decision which sets up a potential showdown at the U.S. Supreme Court Kut reporter actually Lopez joins us now from Austin and Ashley this latest ruling is not like flipping a light switch abortions didn't just suddenly resume overnight in Texas What are you hearing from providers today Yeah that's right It's not like when that order came down last night providers immediately started offering abortions past 6 weeks What actually is happening is that providers are finding themselves in a really tricky legal situation That's because right when the ruling came down something like 70 minutes later Texas attorney general announced an appeal to the 5th circuit Court of Appeals which is one of the most conservative federal appeals courts in the country if not the most And it's largely expected that any day now and I mean I'm even preparing for as early as today this lower court order will be lifted and abortions after 6 weeks will be banned again So and I talked to a legal expert this morning He says he expects that whatever relief abortion providers got from this ruling last night will be very very short lived A little bit of whiplash for sure So I know you've also been talking to groups that are opposed to abortion rights groups that are very much in favor of this law What have they said Well they're obviously unhappy with this ruling from a federal judge in Austin right But they say they're also fully expecting the 5th circuit Court of Appeals will side with them and allow the Texas abortion ban to go back into effect They also went as far as to say that they believe private citizens will also be able to go back and Sue people who provide aid or abet someone who gets an abortion past 6 weeks while this court order is in effect You know of course that's what someone does get the procedure after 6 weeks So and for folks unfamiliar Texas laws kind of strange because it's not technically enforced by the state It was written to be enforced by private citizens which is another reason the legal situation here has been so tricky Right And the federal judge his name is Robert Pittman He called the abortion ban flagrantly unconstitutional What else did he say about his reason for putting the law on hold even if it's temporary Well he points out that roe V wade is still the law of the land Any abortion pre viability is protected under the constitution and the Supreme Court's own legal precedent So when lawmakers pass this law they knew they were violating roe V wade and the judge said that This is why Texas lawmakers created this weird enforcement system that relies on private citizens They wanted it to be harder to strike down in court because they knew it was clearly unconstitutional So after the Court of Appeals right What's next The Supreme Court had already declined to block this law Could it make it make its way back up to the highest court Yeah it is fully expected to you know go back to the Supreme Court I mean this is a weird as I mentioned sort of weird legal situation but I don't see a way in which this doesn't make it back to the core And I think the bigger question right now is what this means for abortion providers and right now they made it clear that even as this works through this sort of winding path back up to the Supreme Court you know they want to see abortions protected and able to resume So I mean there's just we don't know what the road ahead looks like but it's like very it's really hard to sort of suss out and anticipate.

Texas Court of Appeals roe V wade Austin U.S. Supreme Court Lopez Robert Pittman Ashley Supreme Court
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Consumer Finance Monitor

Consumer Finance Monitor

02:51 min | 6 months ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Consumer Finance Monitor

"Supreme court decided this ramirez case recently and it has something to do with standing in the fair credit reporting act. So can you just start off by telling the audience. What happened in ramirez. Yeah for sure. Chris thank you. Ramirez is a very interesting case and something that should have significant impact on class litigation for years to come In order to pursue any claim in federal court you need to have article three standing prior supreme court decisions clarified that. Establishing standing requires a plaintiff to show three. Thanks i a concrete particularized an actual or imminent injury. Second that the injury was likely caused by the defendant and third that the injury would likely be redressed by judicial relief. Ramirez as you pointed out involves the evaluation at definition of concrete and particularized injury under article three and whether or not a plaintiff has standing to pursue a claim it did involve an f. cra claim claim under the Reporting act but i think the impact of it is going to be much broader than that. But let me tell you about. The claim was so ramirez alleged that his name was wrongly added to opec list of terrorists drug traffickers and serious criminals and he claims that he was denied a car purchase as a result of that reporting When ramirez asked trans union for copy of his report after the denial of that sale they sent him that report without mentioning the. Oh fackler the next day trenching and send him a letter advising that his name was considered a potential match to the fat list but didn't include a copy of the summary of rights that was required to be included by statute so ramirez brought a class action alleging that Engine violated the fair credit reporting act by failing to follow reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy. The information in its file failing to provide all of the information in his file upon his request and failing to include the summary of rights with each written disclosure. Being the letter. He got the second time he sought to certify multiple sub classes including approximately eight thousand people who received a letter from trans union indicating their name was potential match to one on the list the parties stipulated however that only about eighteen hundred of those people had their credit reports sense to potential creditors so there was just over six thousand members of the class whose credit reports had not ever been seen by a third party. Notwithstanding that distinction the district court found that all eight thousand people had standing and the jury awarded each class. Member statutory in punitive damages for a huge verdict totaling. Over sixty million dollars. The ninth circuit affirmed finding that all of the class members had standing lowered. The punitive damages portion reducing the total verdict to about forty million dollars so the.

ramirez trans union Ramirez fackler Supreme court cra supreme court opec Chris
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on The Takeaway

The Takeaway

07:40 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on The Takeaway

"As the weather cools down in the pandemic drags on many of us are bracing for a tough winter and even some of the hobbies that people took up to relax back. The spring might be starting to wear thin cooking for example is one of them at the start of the pandemic. Some people were fortunate enough to have the time and resources to try elaborate. Yep. Consuming recipes but seven months in that sourdough starter might be losing a bit of its magic to recapture some of that Joy of Cooking we turn to an expert. My name is Soleil home and the video host of stumped Sola and the resident at Food52 soul is new YouTube show is all about experimenting in the kitchen. We need another plan. I don't think the floating mushroom islands are going to work box Century mac and cheese. It's not going to look anything like the mac and cheese from right now. But you know, it's the 18th century Grand Finale Twinkie. I'm going to turn the twinkie into an ice cream sandwich. I'm going to try and make liquid Subway cookie with the cake and then swirl the cream and some ice cream that we also got from Lego. But outside of her show Soul has been trying to keep it a little simpler lately. I just like everyone else at the beginning of the pandemic was really indulgent and baked a lot made a lot of cakes bread pies cookies, but now I think I'm need a job. Like move into the healthier food root meaning a lot of quinoa and beans before we got into some of Solace cooking tips for the coming months. She told me how cooking has helped her cope during the pandemic something just really comforting about making yourself a meal that really helps in this like chaos to just come home and like take some time. So I guess we're not going anywhere stay home and take some time to make a really nice dinner sit down with your family cuz I I didn't really have that my husband works crazy hours. So we barely got to eat together. So it's really nice being able to have meals together and it just like centers like life a little bit. What about how you cook you talked a little bit about what you're cooking. But what about how you cook Are there specific routines are there things that you do, you know during this time you said we're not going out much. So have there any are there any routines that you've tried to stick with? Yeah. I've definitely gotten more into meal planning and trying to focus more on cooking stuff. That's like a dog One pot or one pan because cooking three meals a day is just like an incredible amount of dishes and it's it's quite a lot of work. So I've just been trying to be a bit more organized like roasted butternut squash to eat for a few days things like that have really helped make it a lot easier is that part of what you would recommend for folks especially as we head into these colder months cuz one of the things I learned the first time around was making sure your freezer is as stocked as it can be with frozen vegetables. And if you eat meat with meat and I kind of you know was doing it at hochberg time. I made a concerted effort to go out and get frozen vegetables and different cuts of meat that I could then, you know separate and fries. Yeah, I mean actually we have a really small New York City refrigerator which doesn't work very well. So the boy really depend on our freezer very well. Our freezer doesn't really push these things. So we're more of like a stocking up on the pantry kind of people but for me, it's like I don't really like making my meals in advance because I get kind of bored but I like making prepping not parts of different components of dishes that I can like play around with later like make a big pot of beans cook up like a quart of quinoa roast a bunch of vegetables and then you can kind of mix and match during the week without getting bored. But we we can't we don't really have freezer access. Unfortunately. I think that if we did we would be stuck in up in there to let's talk about the pantry then what should people be thinking about in their pants off. Well, I believe that you must always have three kinds of rice three kinds of rice. Okay, three kinds of price along a medium and a short. They'll do very different things for you. I like to have a really good best Notting a nice aromatic Jasmine and then I love like a really high-quality sushi rice like to Monkey gold. That's our standard in the house and it's just really nice goes through age of rice can help you kind of cook the globe, you know, you can you can you can have to dig one day with your bus money race and then make handles the other day with sushi rice. So I think having a bunch of rice is great. I love having lots of beans I've been really into giant white lima beans lately because they are so creamy and they taste so indulgent it's feels like something a little bit more special special than like your typical cannellini or kidney bean and then I've just been like a big fan of quinoa lately where I'm like a weird quinoa kick. Holidays are coming up and lots of folks associate holidays with food and unfortunately a lot of us are not going to be spending time with our families in person because of the panoramic. How do you cook for the holidays this year? What should people be thinking about? I mean, you know part of the joy is making huge meals that everyone can share but we can't do that this time. I honestly think that you should still make the huge meal you yeah, I think it feels really fun celebratory. Even if it's just you and like your immediate family cuz you can have leftovers off and I still want to feel like I'm having a celebration for me this year more than ever. It's very important to have like a really fun and exciting Thanksgiving and Christmas because the year has been terrible. I'm not going to agree that has definitely been there already Christmas ornaments that have 20/20 and you know displayed over a a roaring dumpster fire, so I'm not going to disagree with you there. But yep. I will say is that it's been not everybody is as talented as you Sola in the culinary arts. And so for those folks who are listening and saying I don't even know I don't have one kind of rice off and solo wants me to get three kinds of rice. What's a what's what what advice would you give to the folks who are not as Adept at the culinary arts? Well, I think a really easy thing that can also be very comforting is a brace and you really can't mess up a brace. You can get a tougher cut like pork shoulder or lamb shoulder or a short ribs. It's really easy. You can do a larger quantity or a smaller quantity and you just kind of UC RIT you cover it halfway with some broth or another kind of flavorful liquid and then you just let it simmer on top of your stove top really delicately partially covered or throw it in the oven and let it go and you just you just let it cook until it's totally tender and you really can't mess it up dead. You can't overcook it. And it's one of those things that I feel like especially when it's colder makes me feel really cozy and the great thing about it is it gets better the next day so you can still make a big like cut of meat feel like you're having that festive feeling but you're going to have it for like a week and it's only going to get better and I think that that's like anyone can make a brace and Thursday. It's a really good skill to have in your back pocket. It's so much easier than you think you just cook it forever. That's all there is to it. Are there you mentioned earlier one pot or one-pan meals. Are there any that you recommend are particularly simple to make are there any go to's for folks who might be juggling, you know other things like kids and work and now back to cooking but I mean, I think there's a lot of things..

YouTube Sola Joy New York City hochberg Notting Adept
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on The Takeaway

The Takeaway

07:43 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on The Takeaway

"How Americans should live their lives. So it it's interesting Christian meantime, the problem is as you mentioned, there are you know, a million Americans have been pushed into poverty. And while the GOP has gotten its Victory. It has kept its promise President Trump in particular has kept his promise to make sure that they seat as many judges as I possibly can they have done that but they have abdicated their moral responsibility to the American public that is suffering right. Now. How do they expect to stand? Maybe this is to Amy's earlier point that they're betting on the short-term versus the long-term precisely, you know, and and that's why it's interesting because right now based on this evident power grab the question is will voters respond with birth. Voters punish them and and we need to see what happens after the election. How big if if biting winds how big he wins and also if he takes back the Senate how big that take back is because based on that mandate they will now have to make a decision. What do we do to reverse this trend? Yes, of course, they have this whole eject Biden. I'm sure has all these things he wants to do but the question is will the courts to push back on those policy agendas. And if the courts begin striking down Democratic wage legislation, which is what many progressives and many Democrats fear that Amy Coney Barrett in the consumer majority. Now, let's say there's a new Voting Rights Act that will protect the right of right to vote moving forward will an activist Supreme Court go and do away with that then, you know, then what's even the point of passing Democratic legislation if you're going to have courts to suck. Making it all down. What is the concern about this word? Court-packing? Yeah. I think I'm not sure that there's that much of a concern right now. I think that Democrats are so upset at about the way that things have played out, you know, the the idea that the the Gorsuch seat was a stolen seat. You know that Mitch McConnell said were not going to confirm wage adjusted during the presidential election year. And then now that the Republicans are in the White House and they have the opportunity to confirm a justice during the presidential election year and they went ahead and did it, you know, but it was it was taboo for a long time. I think that there was a sense that that you know talking about court-packing might somehow hurt the Democrats in in the upcoming election. And you know, I'm I'm not sure that there's a sense that that there is much of a harm right now from talking about it the idea that what about term limits Amy. What about that? What about implementing or yep? Hitting the power of support. Is that something that Democrats could do it is something it's interesting because term limits too many people I was actually talking about this is my seventeen-year-old daughter this morning, like it sounds like a much more reasonable wage. Yeah, too many people, you know, the idea that you know eighteen years or so sounds very very civilized, you know, and then you would know when Justice was going to roll off and in advance of an upcoming presidential you need say okay this President would get depict the next nominee, but that actually my understanding is that it would be hard and Christian can correct me if I'm wrong would be harder to do because the Constitution gives Supreme Court Justices life tenure whereas the Constitution does not set the number of justices on the Supreme Court. So, you know, it seems somewhat counterintuitive that that adding justices to the court might actually be easier as a constitutional and legal matter than limiting their terms. Christian in terms of the way that what we know about Judge Barrett and I'm not going to get into how she will rule on a or b topic cuz we don't know how she's going to rule and we can't predict that off. The the question I have is how little we took away from her after these confirmation hearing she answered less than 20% of the questions that were posed to her. And I would love if you could help us understand that in the contract. For example, Sonia Sotomayor is confirmation hearing how different were the two. Yes. She was not forthcoming at all. I mean there were basic questions that she got as like his voter intimidation illegal and she wouldn't answer that when the reality is it is illegal. What what does she have to say about the peaceful transfer of power or you know other authoritarian Tendencies of the current president and she wouldn't answer those things. And of course the reality is that she was just protecting her own nomination because we know that the president tends to you know, not take kindly to people who Crossed him and so she was shrewd in that sense. But the reality is is that you know, she took part in this process. She accepted it for all it is for all his Rush. She appeared on the balcony of White House South lawn last night for what looked like a campaign event because Donald Trump tweeted video a video of it off and that's not typical or behavior for a Supreme Court Justice is yeah. It's it there are a lot of things that we're a typical about this process and the fact that you know, she kind of took it all in and she played along I mean she was in the middle of that super spreader event when she was announced for covet mean it just tells you something that she was pretty much in the tank with this whole thing and and I think people should draw their own conclusions from that. The the reality is that she is on the court right now. There are cases before the court dealing with this very election whether mail-in ballots will be counted well, You know it everyone would she be forced to recuse herself from those cases? She won't be forced to do anything Supreme Court Justices call their own shots when it comes to recusal. And the question is well Amy Coney Barrett Barrett do the right thing and and the reality is is that there's already a majority in the court that is hostile voting rights. The question here is well, she joined them or will she step aside and just last night. There was a huge number of opinions from the Supreme Court dealing with voting in Wisconsin. There's another case from Pennsylvania pending another one for North Carolina. And and this is where the rubber will meet the road and and what she does in those cases will be dispatched a demonstration of whether she is independent or not. And and I think if she recuses at least she will be shown the public that you know, that that the stakes are high in their own Integrity off. Line Amy as we close out the segment. What does this do the whole process the way that this that the path that you mentioned Merrick Garland and Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. And now we've got Amy Coney Barrett very contentious nomination processes and yet like as I mentioned President Trump kept his promise to the American public by by seating as many judges as he could. How is this changed the court for the foreseeable future. We've got about a minute-and-a-half to go. Yeah, so interestingly until before the death of Justice Ginsburg the Supreme Court sort of was doing actually fairly well in these polls involving public, and so, you know, my impression has been that when you have something like this the Supreme the sort of perceptions of the Supreme Court do tend to take a hit and then the Supreme Court you usually come to recover but then it will will take a hit again and but it will be, you know, the combination of this and the possibility that the Supreme Court could be drawn into election-related litigation. And you know, I think it could certainly affect the Public's perception and and you know, we saw this after Bush.

Supreme Court Amy Coney Barrett Amy president Amy Coney Barrett Barrett Justice Ginsburg Donald Trump President GOP Senate Mitch McConnell Sonia Sotomayor White House Biden Merrick Garland White House South Bush Brett Kavanaugh
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on The Takeaway

The Takeaway

08:11 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on The Takeaway

"Judge Barrett now Justice Barrett submitted her questionnaire. They had been really considering birth for a vacancy for a couple of years. And you saw when she submitted her questionnaire to the Senate Judiciary Committee that within a day or two after just as long as death on September 18th. They had contacted her about the possibility of filling the vacancy and had offered her the job on September 21st. I believe they didn't announce it until September 26th. And then, you know just moved forward at at lightning speed. There is a an editorial the editorial board of the New York Times wrote to talk about this process and I have to say Amy. It's one thing to have a remarkably fast confirmation process and it's another thing in the words that they use in this editorial to use quotes. Brute-force here. I think that's what's frustrating to watch is how a lot of this feels less about the American public and its citizenry and more about brute force and Power on the part of the Republicans home. Yeah. I mean there was not a lot that the Democrats could do. Once the nomination had been made to stop her and the the Democrats sort of recognized that and the strategy at the confirmation hearing was really less about any sort of procedural maneuverings to try to stop her and they really focused on you know, some of their differences and what her confirmation would mean for the court rather than than trying to change the minds of any senators or such Christian. I want to bring you in here because to Amy's point there wasn't a lot that Democrats could do. What did they do enough. I feel like there was a lot of grandstanding. There were a lot of photographs left there. They protested by not showing up but I don't know. I mean could they have asked more questions wage? Judge Barrett now Justice Barrett only answered about less than 20% of the questions. She was posed. So what could the Democrats have done differently here? They actually did everything they could do given a circumstances as Amy pointed out there in the minority their options were limited and really they hammered home the point that they've been trying to hammer even since the last election that the Affordable Care Act is on the line and indeed the the law is on the Supreme Court's docket at the moment and their point. I don't know if they were successful. They try to paint her as a sure-fire vote against the law given her past statements. And the question is will she go with that? Yes or no. Was that a pre-election strategy to drive out people to the polls more so than the feeds her. I think that's that's a question that the election is going to answer because depending on how well this strategy worked and how big a turnout Amy Coney Barrett confirmation page. Result and I think they'll then decide do we have a mandate to do something else? I think it's less about stopping her confirmation. But whether more about whether voters have it in them to truly, you know exact and almost feared as word revenge for what happened, you know, because Millions as the opening said were ready voting 60 million as of yesterday and in a sense, there's something quite anti-democratic about pushing through a nomination as votes are being cast and as people maybe already voting off because Ruth Bader Ginsburg died because they want a Justice that is kind of in her mold and the fact that Amy Coney Barrett is the exact opposite of that page that may itself result in political retribution and I want to pick up on that point Amy because the idea that this is anti-democratic the Christian just pointed out I think wage. And pointing back to this New York Times editorial. We're essentially, you know, it feels in many ways that the American that the United States is somehow being held hostage by a very Miami leave you quite frankly and pointing out here that Republican presidents have appointed 14 of the previous eighteen justices on the court. The Americans have voted for Democratic nominees in six of the last seven presidential elections and yet this is what our Supreme Court looks like a me. How do we explain that? I mean, I think that is what sneakers so many people and you know, I think for the Republicans that it really is as Christian said you're talking about, you know, there's the ongoing election and it seems like Republicans Republican Senators at least May well have made a calculation that they are going to take the you know, and to be sure I'm not a congressional reporter, but at the takes the short-term And that they may well lose their majority in the senate for the long-term gain of controlling the Supreme Court for you know possibly decades to come, you know, you had Senator McConnell off the other day talking about, you know, how even if Democrats take the the White House and both houses of Congress. They'll have this Supreme Court that's able to sort of push back against the you know the acts of Congress and that is what's frustrating Democrats so much and is you know part of the what's underlying the place, you know, the calls for possibly expanding the court, you know, the Vice President Biden has said that he wants to appoint a commission to sort of study the courts but you know the idea to keep pointing. I mean just when I hear that we're thinking about appointing a commission. It just feels like that's another piece of Washington rigmarole and just you know getting caught in the month. Of of Washington when Americans are saying you may want to appoint a commission but we this this Administration has just appointed three judges in less than four years. I'm sure I mean, I mean, I think you have to look back that way. I think people that the idea that people are talking about corn tech support expansion sort of in the mainstream. Now I think is has come a long way like two years ago even sort of whispering the word Court package was completely taboo or want to get I want to get into court packing in a minute because I want to talk about that strategically, but before we get to that stand by Amy Christian one of the things we hear over and over again is how judges should not legislate from the bench and yet scotus has in many ways because Congress is so broken has had to become in many ways of legislative body and plugged back to this New York Times editorial today. It says today's conservative majority and I'm quoting here is among the most activists in the courts history. How do we explain the hypocrisy their Christian faith? It's interesting because the Republican agenda legislatively is so unpopular the American public just doesn't want what Mitch McConnell and his party have to offer in terms of solutions for the American people that the party turns to the courts to kind of enshrine their vision of society their vision of how the world should work, So it's it's kind of his interesting interplay, you know, we don't have any bills to offer. We've already adjourned the Senate McConnell last night. I turned the set it and so after the election without a covert refill, you know again because his view of how that relief bill should look it is is not what people want. So rather than actually come to the table and offer Solutions you rather, you know takes all his toys and go home and and the fact that he's now insisting instead on this new Justice that will deliver outcomes for decades to come a conservative majority no choice. Just in at the Supreme Court, but also in the federal appeals courts, which also decide many very important cases related to legislation and social policy. You know, it just shows kind of odd how they're play. They're planning to kind of cement their vision for.

Supreme Court Amy Justice Barrett Amy Coney Barrett New York Times Senator McConnell Congress Senate Judiciary Committee Amy Christian editorial board Ruth Bader Ginsburg Republicans United States Washington senate Miami White House Vice President Biden
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on True Mysteries of the Pacific Northwest

True Mysteries of the Pacific Northwest

04:10 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on True Mysteries of the Pacific Northwest

"In either case, a simple majority of the Senate must approve the appointment member. So the Supreme Court appointed for life terms. Wow, terminal wife. Anyway. Though they may be expelled if they are impeached by the House of Representatives and convicted in the Senate. Now only one justice has been impeached that was Samuel Chase who was acquitted in eighteen o five in nineteen, sixty, nine Abe Fortas resigned under threat of impeachment for alleged financial improprieties unrelated to his duties on the court. So these guys have to be pretty straight shooters today. The Supreme Court self regulates the number of cases at handles the Supreme Court, which now enjoys almost exclusive discretion in determining. Its caseload hears about one hundred cases per term, which began on the first Monday in October and typically ends in late June. So the supreme core doesn't necessarily work year round on cases each year, the court receive some seven thousand case requests. The number of these requests increase some fivefold since World War Two, a reflection of the country's population growth progressively more litigious legal culture you know so. That's why they're getting more and more cases a surge in the demands placed by citizens on the government. The number of cases decided by the Supreme Court has declined since nineteen fifties and sixties when civil rights cases dominated the dock at US justices have opted to hear fewer cases. So you can see how zigzag back and forth or maybe roller coaster back and forth, but this begs the question. How does the court to sign which cases to review I in a vote that is usually kept secret the justices decide on the merits of a case. Then they issue the official written decision of the court. The first judgment determines who will write the official decision by tradition at the chief justice is in the majority in his opinions he selects which justice including himself will author the court's verdict. If he is in the minority. The longest serving member of the majority makes the decision writing in an appointment SESA era of John Marshall Chief Justice from eighteen o one, eighteen, thirty five has been common practice for the court to issue formal opinions to justify decisions to defy. Though the Constitution does not require it to do. So drafts of all opinions circulating among the justices and all justices may concur with or dissent from any decision in full or in part the final decision effectively represents the supreme law of the land. Still. How does the Supreme Court justice rule fairly on an issue that he is biased or she is bias on when the founding fathers wrote the US Constitution they intentionally made do judicial branch of the government to be the least powerful that includes Supreme Court justices and all federal judges judges were supposed to be politically neutral and rule on a constitutional and legally pass laws and not on political bias. But judges are still human is subject to their own beliefs and understandings. So the constitution loss, therefore, it is impossible for any judge to be totally unbiased. So when the president nominates any person to serve as a Supreme Court justice for Federal, Judge for that matter, they tend to share the judges tend to share some of the political ideologies of the nominating president. So with that kind of biased with. That kind of partisan appeal. How can affair decision be made? So if you go back to my original question and that was it, how can the Supreme Court fair and biased decisions when they are so partisan divide divided the answer is they can't the partisan nature of the US Supreme Court was produced here night owl sound studio.

US Supreme Court Supreme Court Senate Samuel Chase House of Representatives Abe Fortas official US US Constitution John Marshall president
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

PRI's The World

01:57 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

"A song called roofs so I wrote a lyric and I said like I was talking about India. And I said politic the Queen of Mumbai. You don't WanNA drama anti-g. Come try. You don't want to come. Talk with the. touchable with a Brahmin slow. Stop Ripe. With those words row had hit on one of India's most explosive and divisive issues, the Hindu caste system, the so-called untouchables are supposed to be the lowest caste Brahmin is the highest and the most privileged cast rows Brahman as are many people in the Indian diaspora to some her song was extolling the Indian equivalent of white supremacy in the US. Critics were harsh, so it's like if you google me and Google cast, I'm I like poster child for like Hey, and it's like I am not. All you know, she says as an American. She was never educated about the caste system, and didn't understand the implication of her words, even though right now untouchables Muslims and other minorities are building a civil rights movement and protesting persecution by the Hindu, nationalist government was just a poorly written lyric. I'd say now. It was it was done out of. Just ninety. Not Understanding like. The depth of the pain row says she's gone through a process of educating yourself and recognizing her own privilege. Despite the controversy, her success has continued to grow. She hosted the American music awards and became the first woman to headline India's biggest music festival. Just as the corona virus pandemic hit Cheetham filmed the music video for a new song called NRI for non-resident Indians. Job. Week in the..

India Google American music awards Mumbai Cheetham US
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

PRI's The World

06:02 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

"For a second night in a row police fired tear gas to disperse the crowd since twenty twenty began. There've been demonstrations all over the world, Iraq, the UK Hong Kong South Korea and of course protests here in many American cities, large and small. We're GONNA talk about protests and police with Brian Kastner. He's an investigator for Amnesty International and he led a team that looked at how police handled protests in the US. Following the killing of George Floyd I, Brian. For having me I know you're team analyzed five hundred videos taken between may twenty, six and June fifth of police and protesters across the US give us the headline. What was the interaction like? We'll what we saw is that. Just violence everywhere and I think that the very low threshold of police to use violence when they could've used other means or even speak to people that's really what was incredible and shocking, and also that the violence was very widespread, so out of those five hundred videos we narrowed it down to a hundred and twenty-five specific incidents in forty states and the District of Columbia across those ten days like you said it wasn't just New York and La in Seattle. It was little towns. Conway Arkansas Fort Wayne Indiana. It was just incredible how widespread and pervasive it was. And what kind of violence are we talking about? You're talking about violence perpetrated by police or violence among everyone. That's a good question, so we were looking specifically a cases where police unlawfully used violence or used force when they didn't have to. And so certainly, some of these protests were violent. Some protests turned into riots. We were focused on incidents for example like in Huntington. Beach California where protesters were laying down in the street. To protest laying on their stomachs, police just start shooting at them with pepper balls in that particular case, but there were a number one of these where the protests were completely peaceful, and whether it was because a curfew was hit, or because police just decided they needed to clear the road or something where these peaceful protesters were met with violence and really just kind of extraordinarily inappropriate ways I want to drill down a little and I the question of course. Where did you get the videos? And how do you verify their authenticity? So we are trolling social media. We're looking at read it. We're looking TIKTOK facebook twitter these. Videos that are usually put up by people themselves. Sometimes it was news reports local TV channels that were putting stuff up, but the majority was what we call user generated content, and then we go through a process where we determine when it happened to make sure it's not old to make sure where it happened specific dates and locations I mean these are the same techniques we would use to figure out where an airstrike occurred in Libya for instance, except now we're using clues in the background of these videos to confirm that. Yes, this really did happen. Didn't Richard and Virginia a certain time and place on a specific day. Now. You've studied police actions against protesters in other countries. Give some examples, because of course what I'm getting at is trying to compare police response in a fair way. Absolutely, still, for example, I was in Hong. Kong last year, documenting those protests and what we saw in Hong, Kong. Lot was the misuse of tear-gas firing tear-gas in confined spaces, firing tear-gas in places where the crowd couldn't disperse. There's no point in firing. Tear gas at a crowd. If there's no way for them to leave if they're trapped and we saw that all the time in Hong, Kong and unfortunately we saw that as well in the United States with the different about what seems to go on in the US versus other countries. It's been less violence, but it's been. It's only been different in magnitude, not in type and what I mean by that is. We were investigating in Iraq last year in Baghdad were dozens of people were killed because tear gas canisters were fired directly at their heads, and they died in really gruesome ways, and unfortunately we've seen in the united. States as well. It hasn't killed dozens. The magnitude is different, but your gas has been fired directly at people. There's a journalist in Fort Wayne. Who Lost Deny because of that and so unfortunately, there's more similarities than I care to admit. Early on in this interview you said that what the police are doing in some instances here in the US is unlawful. What makes what they're doing unlawful? Right so standard for unlawful is international human rights, law, and the UN standards and so inappropriate use of force, excessive use of force beatings again peaceful protesters, the indiscriminate firing of rubber bullets into crowds, trapping people with tear gas. All of those are potentially unlawful acts by the police Brian Kastner is senior crisis adviser for Amnesty International thanks a lot for speaking with us. Appreciate it, thank you. It's been roughly fifty years since the first big wave of Indian immigrants started settling in the US, so maybe it was just a matter of time before an Indian American musician made the cover of rolling stone India, but as the world's Rupa Shenoy reports the cross cultural fame comes with twice the potential for culturally insensitive mistakes. Long before the row was on the cover of Rolling Stone India wearing a Cape Sunglasses and an attitude. She was a classical Indian dancer, kid. that. GROWING UP IN LA rows. Parents got her a live in dancing instructor. She practiced seven hours a day by your team's. She was performing professionally before huge audiences in the US and India and feeling out of place in school I would travel and tour when I was a kid. I would I would things so I was different? You know than people might class. She didn't feel like she belonged anywhere then she heard Lauren Hill and.

United States Brian Kastner Hong Kong Iraq UK Hong Kong South Korea India Amnesty International La George Floyd twenty twenty Conway Arkansas Fort Wayne Ind investigator Huntington Fort Wayne Libya Lauren Hill California
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

PRI's The World

02:07 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

"The I have to be really careful, and then as in our culture in slum restart the conversation by saying Salaam Aleikum but. That's been kind of qualify it as illegal in China right now I just start by saying hi, and then every so we talk about is. That could be really careful before we speak out. The Chinese government is actually labeled you a terrorist. Will you be speaking out about all of this? And you worry that continued activism could end up by targeting your family back in China so. Called me as a terrorist. I, haven't got any direct threat to myself. My family here in the US but. The indirect threat is through my mom, so all those limitations is mainly the larceny and dip, pushing me to stop speaking from speaking all, but I got I got no other choice. Forget jaw dot is a software engineer in Virginia. He's active in the wigger. Human Rights Community for God. It's good to speak with you again. Thank you very much, thank you. You're listening to the world. Filipina journalist goes to the MATT fighting for press. Freedom I felt like I spent my entire career going to the gym to get ready for this moment I'm Marco Werman journalist Maria Recipe faces six years in prison for cyber liable. She compares reporting in the Philippines right now to working in a war zone her story coming up on the world. I'm Marco Werman. This is the world where co production of the BBC World Service W. G. B. H. and P.. Rx preserving forests is key to fighting climate change, but it is an uphill battle. We lose some nineteen million acres of forest each year today. We're looking at an accidental solution to part of the problem on this week's installment of the big fix. Have come here to let you know that change is coming whether you like it or not..

Marco Werman Chinese government China software engineer US Human Rights Community Philippines BBC Virginia Maria Recipe W. G. B. H.
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

PRI's The World

07:07 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

"The fact that China has concentration camps. The estimated one million inmates in the west of the country are weaker, a mostly Muslim minority president trump signed a law yesterday authorizing sanctions on Chinese officials involved with US camps, but on the same day allegations surfaced that president trump told. Told China last year. He was fine with the camps. Those details came from a leaked excerpt of a book by former National Security Adviser John Bolton and have not been verified. Bonnie Glaser is director of the China Power Project. The Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington well. We don't know whether or not president trump actually did support or imply that he supported the policy in China of imprisoning weaker. But I believe that it makes sense because president trump has really not paid much attention to right or the weaker issue in particular president, trump has been focused primarily on trade and the bilateral trade deficit that the states has with China. The administration as you know, is defending itself from Bolton's allegation by highlighting the weaker human rights law that the president signed yesterday. What does it actually do well the law itself simply requires president trump and his administration to submit a report to Congress Define Chinese officials and other individuals who are responsible for the detention of leakers without charges and trial. And degrading inhumane treatment of these groups. But apart from that report, it is uncertain whether or not the administration would apply sanctions to individual. Also the legislation gives the administration the right to impose sanctions in this could include asset blocking visa rope revocations, even in eligibility for people to enter the United States, but the legislation really gives the White House room to opt against imposing sanctions. If they choose so so there's no authenticity so there seems to be a glaring contradiction between the new law. Sentiments alleged in John Bolton's book. How are we supposed to square that circle can can both be true? Well the president. In the period of trade negotiations with China I think just did not want to take on any other issues that might disrupt those negotiations in preventing an agreement, the United States in China of course signed a face on trade agreement in January and now the president's priorities appear to have changed. He is now focused on winning reelection and public opinion. Polls show that Americans have a high degree of unfavorability toward China that they see threats emanating from China so I believe that president trump is trying to use this issue to win votes and chief his reelection, so his whole goals have changed. China publicly denies the mass incarceration of the weaker people, but we also know of cases of workers who have been affiliated with Al Qaeda, and Isis so has there ever been to suggestion of China? Justifying the mass incarceration of Leaguers on national security grounds? Yes, the Chinese have explicitly said that there are weaker 's who have been involved in terrorist actions, and there have been a handful of terrorist actions in China over the last ten years, but they're his not a great deal of evidence that upwards of two to three million people are connected to some terrorism Bonnie glaser will leave it there. Thank you for your time. Thank you. That was Bonnie glaser director of the China Power Project of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In Washington Weavers in the United States have been following all of this very closely. Forgot jaw dot is a software engineer in Virginia. He's worked to get the weaker human rights. Law enacted so for cod now that it's been signed by president trump how you feeling this really exciting. kind up became relief for all of us will have been drinking all we can do while risking our family. Members were still living inside China so it is really a huge step into victory I will say. It comes at the same time, as John Bolton's excerpt from his upcoming book, in which she alleges trump okayed detainment camps, concentration camps in China for weavers and other Muslim minorities. Does that change at all how you feel about the legislation passing? I got feelings at some point that kind of feel as an American, and especially working for the US government as a software engineer, but kind of felt betrayal, because it's really personal to me at my own president will kate that the Chinese government was camps which locked up my mom for more than fifty months, but by saying that a signed a bill, and then made it to into low. It was kind of leaving so just hope is bill. You'll be the first major step interviewer history, so we can put more sanctions and immoral limitations to the Chinese government or the officials, and then put an end to the camps as though forced labor. This is personal for you for caught. Your family is still in western China when we spoke last year, you described how your mother has been affected by this. Are you able now to be in touch with her? Yes, I can talk declared, but the communication has been Rowley Limited especially after last. November of my mom's story has published in the new. York Times pods guests, and later on there is a documentary about my mom storing the EJ loss Internet at home. This cutoffs an also this year mid February stopped working so it visibly worries Tom Perez as I wasn't able to talk more than forty five days, and after that she got another number as permit by the Chinese police. But now I don't WanNa talk the chorus through 'cause I can't even do facetime or because with my mom. And how free do feel to express yourself to her and she to you? In those calls there is there is no freedom at all everything recap to talk. Is We all know that's listened? By the Chinese police? At some point, you must be wondering whether she is self censoring or whether there was a kind of brainwashing going on. Do you think about that just couple days ago? The Chinese local government appreciates the came to her house and hurts right a statement saying that she was well. By the Chinese government, though local government officials, and then just praising how she has been taken care of. Has All of this affected your relationship with your mother? If you feel like you're not hearing the truth, because of censorship or other reasons, I mean that's got gotta be difficult. It is because I used to talk to my mom about almost everything..

president China trump United States John Bolton Chinese government China Power Project Center for Strategic and Inter Bonnie glaser Bonnie Glaser National Security director software engineer Washington Tom Perez Virginia Washington Weavers
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

PRI's The World

03:14 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

"It's one of several groups supporting the Filter Hotel here in Wada's and along the Mexican border, migrant shelters are to control the spread of covid nineteen, so they can't just immediately take new people in this filter hotel offers safe place to quarantine before people can go to a longer term shelter after new guests wash up. Money leads them to a waiting area and explains the setup thick. Remember. Know. There's health screening than guests are assigned a private room letitia Chavarria is the hotels. Medical Coordinator is let mcgann dealers. Years ago what the day on the hearsay Chavarria says! This hotel is taking migrants off the street and away from the risk of potential infection. There's an isolation wing for people with covert symptoms, and there's another wing for everyone else. Protocols are strict once a doctor goes up to the `isolation area. She can't come down until her shifts. Anything, she needs gets in a bucket on the end of a rope. It's like a makeshift elevator chevet jokes. There's room for one hundred and eight guests here right now. It's nearly full. Some of the migrants because of the trump administration policy must wait in Mexico as their asylum cases. Play out in the US. Others like this woman from Honduras were rejected at the US border based on public health order about Colvin nineteen. She asked not to use her name out of fear for her family's safety standing outside her room. She takes in the fresh air. Her four year old son plays with blocks next to her. Recover. Look been there. For sustained, she says she sold candy and Hunter S. earning just enough to get by then. Gang tried to extort her, but she couldn't pay them, you know. What the cellular in! Methodical. She says the gang told her she had less than twelve hours to leave the country or else. She fled with her two children. They managed to cross the Mexico border, but she says they were detained by US officials. American-arab, she says the officials grabbed her worse than you would. Animal and that her shirt was ripped. She says her family was then dropped off at a bridge that connects El, Paso and Juarez Memorial. Follow. He didn't tell me anything. She says it was really ugly. Mexican officials brought her to the filter hotel. She says she's grateful to be here, but isn't sure what's next. She can't go back to her country. For now though she has a safe place to stay, it's home here. There's colorful flower pots on the windowsill and paintings by kids around. Everyone gets checkups from volunteer doctors unique sequence. Solace is one of those doctors all women who work here as something William Difficult for. Made Anti. Kansallis identifies with the guests, she's an asylum seeker. She left Cuba last year and has been living in Wada's to waiting for her own court date in the US..

Filter Hotel US letitia Chavarria Wada Mexico Kansallis Colvin Hunter S. Gang Medical Coordinator William Difficult Paso Honduras Juarez Memorial El Cuba
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Radio Free Flint

Radio Free Flint

06:44 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Radio Free Flint

"In that courtroom while it is in session I flew to Washington DC to sit in on some cases. Getting a measure of your opponent opponent is important, too. It helps to read your opponent by intangible cues like basketball. If you have to make adjustments in a courtroom, you have to make adjustments in the courtroom on the fly. If your opponent has a temper, he. Has a know it all demeanor, etc, the new adjust your game and exploit it to your advantage. One of the most important things I learned from years of arguing cases and being involved in politics was that if you want to win the hearts and minds of jurors or the public yet better argue to the middle of the case, or the or the policy were seeking. Extremists get the headlines, but lawyers who find the sweet spot in the middle when the game. A courtroom is like a stage. You have a captive audience. Those justices had to suffer me for the time allotted. My goal wasn't to just show up for bragging rights I wanted to win, and not just when I wanted to kick. That arrogant lawyers ass. The meeting in Detroit at Coney Island with a defense lawyer had its desired effect. It lit me on fire to prove he wasn't any better in the courtroom than me. Once the big show started. It was obvious that Moran Had A. Was a lot better at writing briefs than dancing in the courtroom under fire. He struggled at reading the justices that day. Justice Ginsburg engaged in a withering exchange with Moran. My experiences in courtrooms involved thinking on my feet. Maran's experiences were writing and research at a desk. My skills learned both in the streets of Flint and in the county courthouse. Were that my fastballs were placed exactly where I wanted them to go. I took that confidence to Washington. While I am at this on this rant. What really gave me another gear to win? was as condescending interaction with me. Lumping me with all prosecutors who he thinks, don't care about poor black people from flint. He was wrong on that one. He never met anyone like me before because I had more education than him and a whole bunch of street smarts earned from the University of dixieland subdivision. My guess is that until mirant started representing poor people on appeals, he had few encounters with poor black people. My hunch was proven right when Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg went after him with questions about what he would tell his client if he had been at at the trial and been that Vincent's lawyer in that flint courthouse. Moran Red in the face, and began to flounder badly, never gave an answer I knew at that moment he had lost the case. Any way back to the supreme, court. I shook his hand and wished him well. I learnt I leaned in his direction and joked. I said you're very lucky. I see in my last name. That with good humor shot back now. I am lucky. My last name is not Gore. Then suddenly. The clerk called the courtroom with an admonition to draw near to the business of the United States Supreme Court. And the justices appeared. On Q. In like a Vaudeville, act. Allowed Bell Rang. And, the Velvet curtains opened. There were nine justices. We're standing behind the bench staring at me. The show was to begin. My first thoughts were these these guys are really old? There's old is Moses. Leaving the court I thought to myself. Those justices were alum lot smarter than me. Justice William Rehnquist than called the case I arose, nervously addressed the court with the traditional salutation MR chief justice, and may it please the core? I confidently delivered my introduction, and thus began the longest and most thrilling twenty minutes my legal career. And there. I stood fielding questions from the justices of the United. States Supreme Court. All, that preparation kicked in. All that I had learned as a kid. Streets of Flint Michigan gave me the will to win. This was no different than playing basketball to win on the asphalt courts in dixieland subdivision. I wanted to win didn't want to win I really really wanted to win. For All the right reasons. I kept thinking. If I got to tell my grandkids about this case I sure and a how didn't WanNa? Tell them that I lost it. The justices zeroed in on questions about four sentences into my argument. Just Justice Scalia wanted to drag me off into some radical far-right swamp with an argument I didn't agree with it all. Being a prosecutor, my guess was he was GonNa vote for my position whatever they were in this case. It was those on the liberal side of the equation. I wanted to convince in order to win nine to nothing. It was necessary to find the middle of this group and go at it as hard as I could. My heart was pumping hard like I was riding my bike up the rocky mountains. My ears were beat red. I left. I left having left every bit of myself in that Tornado courtroom. Left there, knowing that all the courage and effort author risk taking in all the bobbing and weaving in that courtroom necessary to win. It was the best that I could give. I also left with two white quilt pins compliments of the court to commemorate this once in a lifetime experience. I won the case.

United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Maran Justice Scalia Moran Red Flint basketball Washington prosecutor Justice William Rehnquist Moses flint courthouse Flint Michigan University of dixieland subdiv Detroit Bell Rang Coney Island Gore Vincent
"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Radio Free Flint

Radio Free Flint

06:44 min | 1 year ago

"u.s. supreme court" Discussed on Radio Free Flint

"In that courtroom while it is in session, I flew to Washington DC to sit in on some cases. Getting a measure of your opponent opponent is important, too. It helps to read your opponent by intangible cues like basketball. If you have to make adjustments in a courtroom, you have to make adjustments in the courtroom on the fly. If your opponent has a temper, he. Has a know it all demeanor, etc, the new adjust your game and exploit it to your advantage. One of the most important things I learned from years of arguing cases and being involved in politics was that if you want to win the hearts and minds of jurors or the public yet better argue to the middle of the case, or the or the policy were seeking. Extremists get the headlines, but lawyers who find the sweet spot in the middle when the game. A courtroom is like a stage. You have a captive audience. Those justices had to suffer me for the time allotted. My goal wasn't to just show up for bragging rights. I wanted to win, and not just when I wanted to kick that arrogant lawyers ass. The meeting in Detroit at Coney Island with a defense lawyer had its desired effect. It lit me on fire to prove he wasn't any better in the courtroom than me. Once the big show started. It was obvious that Moran Had A. Was a lot better at writing briefs than dancing in the courtroom under fire, he struggled at reading the justices that day. Justice Ginsburg engaged in a withering exchange with Moran. My experiences in courtrooms involved thinking on my feet. Maran's experiences were writing and research at a desk. My skills learned both in the streets of Flint and in the county courthouse. Were that my fastballs were placed exactly where I wanted them to go. I took that confidence to Washington. While I am at this on this rant. What really gave me another gear to win. was as condescending interaction with me. Lumping knee with all prosecutors who he thinks don't care about poor black people from flint. He was wrong on that one. He never met anyone like me before because I had more education than him and a whole bunch of street smarts earned from the University of dixieland subdivision. My guess is that until mirant started representing poor people on appeals, he had few encounters with poor black people. My hunch was proven right. When Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg went after him with questions about what he would tell his client if he had been at at the trial and been that Vincent's lawyer in that flint courthouse. Moran turned red in the face and began to flounder badly, never gave an answer i. knew at that moment he had lost the case. Any way back to the Supreme Court. I shook his hand and wished him well. I learnt I leaned in his direction and joked. I said. You're very lucky I. have see in my last name. That with good humor shot back now. I am lucky. My last name is not Gore. Then suddenly. The clerk called the courtroom with an admonition to draw near to the business of the United. States Supreme Court. And the justices appeared. On Q. In like a Vaudeville Act. Allowed Bell Rang. And the Velvet curtains opened. There were nine justices. We're standing behind the bench staring at me. The show was to begin. My first thoughts were these these guys are really old? There's old is Moses. Leaving the court I thought to myself. Those justices were alum lot smarter than me. Justice William Rehnquist then called the case I arose nervously addressed the court with the traditional salutation MR chief justice, and may it please the core? I confidently delivered my introduction and thus began the longest and most thrilling twenty minutes my legal career. And there I stood fielding questions from the justices to the United States Supreme Court. All that preparation kicked in. All that I had learned as a kid streets of Flint. Michigan gave me the will to win. This was no different than playing basketball to win on the asphalt courts in dixieland subdivision. I wanted to win didn't want to win. I really really wanted to win. For All the right reasons. I kept thinking if I got to tell my grandkids about this case I sure and a how didn't WanNa tell them that I lost it. The justices zeroed in on questions about four sentences into my argument. Just Justice Scalia wanted to drag me off into some radical far-right swamp with an argument. I didn't agree with it all. Being a prosecutor, my guess was. He was gonNA. Vote for my position whatever they were in this case. It was those on the liberal side of the equation I wanted to convince in order to win nine to nothing. It was necessary to find the middle of this group and go at it as hard as I could. My heart was pumping hard like I was riding my bike up the rocky mountains. My ears were beat red. I left. I left having left every bit of myself in that Tornado courtroom. Left there knowing that all the courage and effort author risk taking in all the bobbing and weaving in that courtroom necessary to win. It was the best that I could give. I also left with two white quilt pins compliments of the court to commemorate this once in a lifetime experience. I won the case.

United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Moran Flint Justice Scalia Moses basketball Washington Maran prosecutor Justice William Rehnquist University of dixieland subdiv flint courthouse Detroit Bell Rang Coney Island Gore Michigan Vincent