32 Burst results for "Us Court Of Appeals"

What will the Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation mean for the 2020 election?

BBC World Service

04:00 min | 4 months ago

What will the Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation mean for the 2020 election?

"We can talk about murder boards. Because Amy Cockney Barrett has just being doing them. I've never heard of murder balls before One of our guests was saying it's the American phrase for a Nintendo practice interrogations where you get people to take you through what you're about to go through. If you're about to go through, for example, the confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court because she is President Trump's pick to fill the vacancy of Ruth Bader Ginsberg. Her appointment would cement Conservative majority on the Supreme Court with enormous political implications. Eyes like nothing seen in U. S history, so close to a presidential election, his Barbara Plata Amy Cockney. Barrett is a dream nominee for those on the right, but it is my honor to nominate One of our nation's most brilliant And gifted legal minds to the Supreme Court Appeals court judge is a formidable intellect, a devout Catholic, a supermom with seven Children. While I am a judge, I'm better known back home as a room, parent, carpool driver and staunchly conservative, although at this White House ceremony, she distanced herself from partisan divides. If confirmed, I would not assume that role for the sake of those in my own circle. And certainly not for my own sake. I would assume this role to serve you. It's just weeks from the election, but nothing is getting in the way of the rush to confirm the new Supreme Court Justice, the third nominated by President Trump, the stakes are just too high. Processes nomination consistent with rules. And I look forward to coming days will be a lot of fun. It will be fun for them. See Graham, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and other Republicans because it's an unprecedented chance to secure a conservative majority on the court for a generation. And also to recharge the election campaign by energizing the base help Amy Barrett and President Trump Fight back stand up for conservative values Republicans But also Democrats have adjusted their campaign adverts to address the unexpected vacancy on the Supreme Court is rushing through a Supreme Court nominee to do just that step away care from millions of Americans and pre existing condition protections for Democrats. This is a nightmare, a job for life. A court that sets the nation's social and cultural direction on issues like gay rights, gun control, abortion and Obama care. Judge Barrett is very fair, but fans of Judge Conti Barrett are convinced she's the best candidate for the job. She's a popular law professor and Laura Walk was one of her students. Judge Barrett is not swayed by any type of personal preferences or things like that again. Witness that in the classroom no one ever knew what Judge Barrett thought about an issue. She never let her students he never Pressured them to think a certain way. Everything was hyper focused on the law. Democrats don't have the votes to stop this, and they're furious about the politics. Today I am nominating Chief Judge Merrick Brian Garland to join the Supreme Court. In 2016, Republicans blocked President Obama from filling a Supreme Court seat because it was an election year. But now that they're in power, they've changed their tune. And the conservative media is almost giddy with excitement. This is going to have a massive impact on the American judiciary, thus gonna have a massive impact. On American culture and society. If Donald Trump secures the Supreme Court seat, even if he doesn't win the election, his presidency will be deemed a success by the ideological right and by evangelical Christians. That's why they voted for him, and it will be remembered as a turning point for the nation on some of the issues that matter the most to Americans.

Supreme Court Amy Cockney Barrett President Trump Chief Judge Merrick Brian Garl Barack Obama Murder Ruth Bader Ginsberg Professor Nintendo Amy Cockney Senate Judiciary Committee White House U. S Barbara Plata Graham Laura Walk Chairman
Uber gets 18-month London license after winning court appeal

The Paul W. Smith Show

05:58 min | 5 months ago

Uber gets 18-month London license after winning court appeal

"Quarter uber lost $1.8 billion because of the covert pandemic. I mean, think about it. How often have you called up an uber or a lift? To catch a ride since the pandemic hit. I mean, I know personally, we used these uber and our family quite a bit a couple times a month between the five of us now we probably haven't used it twice. In four or five months. The company is trying Teo, you know, survive and come back and part of that involves expanding and having rideshare all around the world, including London, where Uber was able to get their license back after winning the court challenge and join us on the phone Now to talk about this is Simon Oh, and Fox News correspondent Welcome to the Bobby Smith Show. My morning, Kevin. So sort of walk us through this. What is what has been the history of uber in London? And then where do we stand today? Why's this ruling so important? That is a troubled history. But this is certainly a crucial victory for uber the taxi service that, as you say, spread all over the world in in recent years, But that rapid expansion as bean bumpy at times on DH no less so than here in the British capital on who ended up being stripped of its license to operate here last year. There's bean a Serie of skirmishes with the transport authority before that, on DH Uber was then told last November that that was it. It was being banned for what transport for London said with a pattern of failings, including summit said that puts passengers at risk well. Uber appealed that ruling. Went across it apologize. It was contrite. It accepted there had bean flaws in the past, but it said it had changed, but it has put things right on DH. Now A judge has sided with the company and the magistrate who heard this case. 10 a crime, said that while Uber wass guilty of historic failings, he said, its record Was improving on that he was satisfied that it is now in the words they used fit and proper to hold a license. So whoever is back it is very happy. London today particularly lucrative market it count 3.5 million regular customers here, so those 3.5 million people can continue to use. That the service transport regulator says it will be watching you that very closely. Yes. So you know here in the states, uber had a bumpy start here is well, And the biggest concern, of course, was people safety and there would be a report here and then a report there and and all of a sudden people were very concerned about how safe they were getting in a car with a stranger. But uber seemed to put together quite a lengthy list of Of things that they that they go through to make sure that the rider's air safe the background checks and being able to identify that driver actually is a driver. The biggest problem after they started went through their their safety checks was, you know, making sure customers got in the right car that they were supposed to be getting in more than anything else? I have had They done that in London. Do they have the same safety procedures? Do they? They make sure that they do background checks on all of that on the drivers, and they do checks on the cars. You know, At first, there were there were not Checks on the actual fitness of the automobiles, But they changed that as well. The car's all have to go in and get checked out before somebody can become another driver. Well, I mean, it's certainly change from the kind of it's almost quite loose seeming ride, hailing service that it used to be way you accepted that it was just going to be a stranger, perhaps rolling up in their car, making a few dollars on the side and taking you around now it's very much much more like a taxi company on duty, said that it'd have increased its safety precautions that said that this verdict is a recognition of its commitment to safety and that it will continue to work constructively. With the regulator. But transport for London laid out a series of floors that it that I had identified last year and perhaps the most car racing complaint from the regulator. It's said that there was a florin uber systems that was allowing unauthorized drivers to upload their photos to another drivers accounts essentially borrow the accounts and make some money. For themselves, and so uber had Bean saying, You know, we've got this sorted. We're doing background checks on the drivers. They've overto have accounted their photos on. And then it turned out there was this huge loophole in the system that meant that wasn't really a promise that was worth more than the paper. It was. It was written in because transport for London said that those uninsured rides involving an unauthorized drivers It says that they carried out more than 14,000 rides before uber fixed this floor so pretty kind of damning indictment from the regulator now at the same time Stream, a half million regular customers. That's a lot. That's a significant proportion of London's population. And so I think this is probably quite helpful for the transport regulator and the mayor of London as well because they had officially kicked to browse and got rid of it. Then you would have some Customer to kind of got attached to ever much cheaper than traditional black cabs here. And so this perhaps works for both sides that the Duke said it has tightened up its safety precautions on for the regulator. It's able to keep you were operating and keep happy that the three million Londoners who use it

London Uber Bean Kevin TEO Fox News Simon Oh Bobby Smith
Uber spared from London ban despite 'historical failings'

WSJ Tech News Briefing

01:44 min | 5 months ago

Uber spared from London ban despite 'historical failings'

"Uber can continue to operate in London for now last year regulators there decided not to renew the ride hailing giants licensed to operate but yesterday the company won its court appeal of that decision our reporter Sam Schechner has more. Regulator said that they had found instances in which unauthorized drivers swap their phones with others, allowing them to pick up writers themselves, which is obviously a a safety issue. Uber's been operating this whole time in London but under the threat that they could be shut down if their appeals don't win and so they court found that has implemented new safety protocols and while not perfect, it is fit to hold a license in the UK. For Uber London is one of the company's biggest global markets and the news comes as Uber is working to build trust with regulators there and around the world under former CEO, Travis Kalmyk. The company often pushed the regulatory and legal envelope to try and speed up growth and in doing. So they often clashed with lawmakers Kalmyk departed as CEO in two thousand seventeen and left the board the last year. And you may remember that Amazon had to postpone its annual Prime Day sales event earlier this summer at that point, the company was struggling to keep up with the crush of orders as the pandemic set in. Now, we've got a new date for prime day and actually it'll be two days October thirteenth and fourteenth while the event normally helps pull in sales during the lull of summer shopping this year, it could help the company break its fourth-quarter earnings record retail analysts are expecting a big showing because of the combination of Prime Day holiday shopping and the general consumer shift to ECOMMERCE.

Travis Kalmyk Uber London London CEO Sam Schechner Amazon Reporter UK
Uber Can Keep Operating In London, Magistrate Rules

WBBM Early Afternoon News

00:25 sec | 5 months ago

Uber Can Keep Operating In London, Magistrate Rules

"Hubert can't keep operating in London after the ride hailing company won a court appeal today against the refusal by transit regulators to renew License. The US company had challenged transport for London's decision in late 2019 not to renew its operating license over safety concerns involving imposter drivers, the deputy chief magistrate wrote in his decision. That he found the company to be fit and proper to hold a London operator's license.

London Deputy Chief Hubert United States
Uber gets back London license after winning court challenge

AP News Radio

00:45 sec | 5 months ago

Uber gets back London license after winning court challenge

"But can keep operating in London after the ride hailing company won a court appeal against the refusal by transport regulators to renew its license the American company had challenged transport for London's decision in late twenty nineteen not to renew its private high vehicle or PHEV operating license over safety concerns involving imposter drivers the magistrate says he took into account whose efforts to improve oversight and didn't find any evidence of a cover up of the driver photo fool problem however he says he wants to hear from lawyers from both sides before deciding how long was last and should be under what conditions it should operate Charles the last month London

London Charles
Washington DC’s highest court grants bar exam waiver for recent law school grads

WTOP 24 Hour News

00:45 sec | 5 months ago

Washington DC’s highest court grants bar exam waiver for recent law school grads

"He sees highest court has made a ruling that opens the door for more law school grads to practice in the district. The D. C. Court appeals approves an emergency waiver related to the pandemic, known as diploma privilege for grads to be licensed in practice law without taking the bar exam. Olivia Carson with diploma privilege for D C, which petitioned the court says they're happy with the order but does produce obstacles for currently employed grads to get the wave. It's leaving out people who We'll have a hard time getting a supervisor to sign off on every single document that they have to produce. CC becomes the fifth jurisdiction in the country to offer the waiver. Ken Duffy w T. O P News

D. C. Court Olivia Carson Ken Duffy W T. O Supervisor
The Cat and Mouse Game at the Mexico-U.S. Border

The World and Everything In It

09:21 min | 6 months ago

The Cat and Mouse Game at the Mexico-U.S. Border

"Paso del Norte Bridge Pass of the North here people crossed from Horace to Al Paso or Paso to warez every day they crossed by car and foot to go to work to school to shop to visit family chaos and clutter hustle and bustle and adjacent train trestle called Black Bridge crosses nearby the scene of the tragic shooting. So many years ago. US border, patrol agent shot, and killed a fifteen year old Mexican boy after that. So what happened at the Rio Grande? Well, the facts are disputed. So we'll tell both sides of the story was talking about the circumstances that brought about the shooting the boy's parents say Sergio was playing a game with friends run across the border to the US side touch defense run back without getting. Caught kind of like a game of chicken. Yeah. I mean what kid hasn't played some version of that Game Kisha branch works for Barra Borderland Connections a nonprofit helping asylum seekers. She spends her days at shelters in El, Paso and shelters in Horace. She works closely with migrants and Border Patrol agents all that to say she's familiar with the area and the dichotomy of working with both sides. There are some kids that that play at the border, the border in New Mexico in an opera. There's a community right beside the border wall. There's a a lot of land and there's a trash pile, and so sometimes, the like moms will go out in like pick things out of the trash Powell for their homes like for household items. There are people that go into that space like where we go to visit the wall there some kids that come up to the wall and they talk to us and we'll just have conversations with them. So. Yeah. Are Kids that play in that area, but they play in the area because it's their backyard. But that's in an opera. What about downtown in the Rio Grande Canal by the bridge where the shooting happened according to my cabdriver it's not generally an area where kids play. Do kids play around the fence around the border. No. They don't let them get near. So that leads us to the other side of the story. Border Patrol says, Sergio was a coyote helping undocumented people illegally cross into the United States. coyotes often use coordinated distraction techniques. Draw the agents attention away from his surroundings victim. An Harrah's was the chief Border Patrol agent out of Paso when the shooting occurred he's now retired we used to call those still do they would call it a sacrificial room. Send someone a across or group appeal across to get the agent to react get the agent to start chasing a group and and what they do is soon as the agent leaves that that high. Position they say whatever they want to send. WHAT THE REAL INTENT It's almost like a diversion. So that happens all the time dangerous game, the game of cat-and-mouse. The boys ran back and forth across the border agent Mesa detained. One of Sergio's friends Sergio ran back to the Mexican side. He hid behind a pillar under the train trestle. That's when agent Mesa shot him in the face. Mesa says Sergio and his friends were throwing rocks, both men, Harrah's and George Gomez. The agent I talked with at the beginning of this episode, Say agents are trained for physical assaults cures, Gomez. Goh, there's different scenario that we run the training. Obviously, I think covered drive away from the air run seek cover and backup call for backup deescalate. Behavior. Here's the thing I don't want to downplay rock-throwing. David. With Iraq agent Mesa may very well have been endangered. Peres. Getting right and he's got a he's hunched over the guy that he was arresting. And you got your back towards man. You're you're you're really at risk even under the high pressure of split-second decision making the use of lethal force here has been criticized bystanders video captured the fatal shooting. In the video Sergio unarmed again, Kisha Branch who works at the border. The story that came out in the news is different from a story that we hear from the agents themselves. So I don't. I don't I have I have no answers Sergio's parents of course, do want answers and a legal remedy. Meaning an award of damages, the family believes the US. Constitution. Guarantees Sergio certain rights now the constitution of the United States setup the framework for the American government and the various rights people have with respect to the government right and the constitution applies to more than US citizens the preamble the very beginning of constitution says we the people of the United States so it doesn't specify Melvin Odi is a constitutional law professor at Faulkner University. which generally talking about in the way, the courts interpret these things into generally talking about the people who comprise the United States. We the people of the United States People Citizens Resident Aliens International Travelers in this country on holiday or for business when you're in the United States, those protections apply to you. But when you go back to wherever your home country is, those objections do not apply United States meaning of course, that's going to be. The Continental United States, but also include The US territories the special maritime jurisdiction of the United States which would be like on the seas. As far as the borders. The constitution applies within our borders and again sort of the territories that we control. Chris Galindo is one of the lawyers who represented the Hernandez family. Here's a clip from a video called Justice for Sergio Audio and Spanish here from a univision news investigation. Dominicano. Wasim Anthem Nisa. He says, can we sue the American government to be sure Hernandez was in Mexico and is Mexican the American government said we can't sue them because this is Mexico. Not The United States we're saying not bullet originated in the United States and they have to pay for the injustice. They did Moses Shindo is guy. I WITH MY NEIGHBORS GET TICKET WINDOW GOES ON WE are saying there are certain laws and certain ways. The Border Patrol agents need to treat human beings Mexican or American according to United States Laws Federal K. K. K. K.. You the Sergio's mom pleads God for help for justice this is going to haunt me until I leave this world. This acronym you can. Okay. Vido. Sergio's parents sued agent Mesa in Federal Court for excessive use of force. They claim Mesa violated Sergio's rights under the fourth and fifth amendments. Now here's a reminder of what those are faulkner professor Melvin Odi. Okay so The Fourth Amendment Fifth Amendment each sort of presents a bundle of rights but the fourth amendment in particular. Presents a list of restrictions on government agents were investigating crimes. Okay. So the prominent one is protection against. Searches and seizures. The court has interpreted seizure to include killing the taking of human. Life. Would have been saying. This was an unreasonable search and seizure the fifth amendment includes several closets. Relevant one, but there's a catch all. Near the end of the Fifth Amendment that says a person can't read deprived of life liberty or property without due process of law. So. In this case, the young man's life was taken. And the Fifth Amendment says, you can't do that without due process of without fundamentally fair legal proceedings. The first time this case worked its way through the court system the fifth US Circuit Court. Of Appeals dismissed the case it held Sergio's parents were not entitled to fourth and Fifth Amendment protections under various legal doctrines, but the Supreme Court said the fifth circuit and properly applied those legal doctrines. So it vacated the decision rendered null and void that was Hernandez one in. Two thousand, seventeen, the Supreme Court then remanded the case with specific instructions. It's at another question needed to be addressed. I is a givens remedy available. The Fifth Circuit said, no in this Supreme Court, appeal followed Hernandez

Sergio United States Border Patrol Mesa United States People Citizens Us Circuit Court Sergio Audio Paso Del Norte Bridge Pass American Government Rio Grande Hernandez Supreme Court George Gomez Horace Fifth Circuit Harrah Barra Borderland Connections New Mexico Melvin Odi El, Paso
"us court appeals" Discussed on The News & Why It Matters

The News & Why It Matters

05:43 min | 9 months ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on The News & Why It Matters

"Watch got off now. The discussion we had yesterday gentleman was we were. It was very clear that what happened to George. Floyd was not okay was not acceptable and I know all all four police officers have been Fired and the FBI state law enforcement president trump. Everyone's looking into it at this point and it it looks like it will be dealt with accordingly and where we we're all in agreement that it should be however you see this violence happening you see the looting taking place you see all of these things that are happening in Minneapolis. Right now and my question is what the hell is this going to solve. It's not going to solve a damn thing and in fact it shows you that when things like this happen. The worst of of America comes out and it is sad. This is an excuse and you see it over and over again. It's an excuse to steal stuff. That's that's it. It's an excuse to break stuff. What did target have anything to do with the death of George Floyd absolutely nothing? The Minneapolis police. They're destroying those police at the same police that are going in there and protecting these neighborhoods. Now look every police officer. I've spoken with and again. I'm not a police officers. Trained an awful lot with them. There's nobody supports what happened there. He was in custody so with the left is now trying to do is make a controversy out of something that is not controversial. This story is not controversial. It's bad it's a travesty. It's a tragedy but everybody from those on the left those on the right or an agreement. The should never have happened and justice has to be served in this case. The problem grant is that there is some controversy over the story and whether or not the narrative should be white police officer murders black unarmed man. So the I think that's the issue here. I don't know what the police officers racist. I don't know whether he was angry. I I don't know any of that. Let the investigation play that out to conclusions on that what I do know. I don't care if he tried to kill these police officers once you are in custody once you are subdued once. You're no longer a threat. Police there is absolutely zero. Reason to ever die in custody the government ever and so this. Where does this move social conversation? Burning down and autozone. Now I guarantee there are people in those people's community that work in that autozone that we're now probably out of a job for three months during during the corona virus Chinese virus crisis. Now they can't go back to work again. This is ridiculous. It's selfish people who were hell bent on violence and thievery Josh. So Sarah Look I I. I'm a law. And Order Kinda law enforcement pro. Police Person I think everyone degree over and over again. I've defended the police when the needs to be defended oppose so-called criminal justice reform. I call it. Jailbreak scathingly opposed. New York's reform laws and things of that nature Another federal law clerk on the. Us Court appeals with for circuit. I saw a lot of COQ lurks chambers. Another judges who are very anti-cop took pride in in standing for the cops when they when they deserve to be stood for even someone of my priors can look at what happened to George and say this is unambiguously wrong and everyone as you mentioned is looking into it so Kudos to them having said that what we just saw that video is why the police is so important that the thin Blue Line is ultimately what separates a civilized society from anarchy and. That was on the video that this anarchy. This is savage anarchy. This I feel like every pop has come out with you know Sarah. We're like this is not America. There's not the American lived in like a religious liberties being trampled on you know like the virtuous signaling in Staten Island with face masks. And everything on this is not America. Either obviously Like protests nine hundred and sixty. They're all sorts of violent protests. So historically speaking obviously there have been any number of occasions that look like this horrifying video but this horrible horrible horrible example to set for two grants point. It does not accomplish anything whatsoever and again those of us who are generally pro-police where pro-police for this reason because the most fundamental most basic level go back to like Locke and Hobbes and all the Seventeenth Century Enlightenment thinkers when you form a social contract when you form government it is to prevent you in in his Leviathan to prevent you from anarchy prevent you from from the sort of savage looting and rioting that we see in that video right there so two things can be true at once. What happened to George Void unambiguously wrong and this response is also unambiguously wrong. I think were in one hundred percent agree with you. I think we all stand with law enforcement and for sure this is an you know Disgusting Act but the the response is so important because it's the response that people are Gonna. Remember more than the act. At this point this honoring the men that lost his life with this. There's no way he's being honored through this right. Plus you're breaking the law. Two wrongs never make a right is. It doesn't add up and I'm standing with you on this. These people that I say. Go through life looking for a reason to lash out. There is an underlying hatred in our country. That's not.

George Floyd officer America Minneapolis autozone Sarah FBI president New York Staten Island Josh Us Court Locke Hobbes
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrives at courthouse for start of corruption trial

Weekend Edition Sunday

03:32 min | 9 months ago

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrives at courthouse for start of corruption trial

"A big court room drama has begun in Jerusalem today the state of Israel versus Benjamin Netanyahu the longest serving prime minister in Israel's history is now the country's first sitting prime minister to face criminal charges while still in office if convicted he could spend years behind bars corruption scandals are brought down other leaders in Israel but not Netanyahu's just begun a new term NPR's Daniel Estrin is joining us now from the courthouse and we should say there is some delay on the line Daniel what was the scene when the turn of a right to the courthouse and he gave a surprise fifteen minute speech on live TV he was surrounded by some of his ministers any alleged that this is all one big conspiracy he said the police justice officials the media are all trying to take me down he said the left wing doesn't like that I won't remove Jewish settlements in the west bank and the left wing couldn't vote me out for more than a decade so they're trying to take me down in courts we journalists were in the courthouse we watched the hearing on closed circuit TV screens everyone in the courthouse wore face masks including Netanyahu and throughout the whole hearing you could hear Bibi Netanyahu supporters right outside the courtroom and the courthouse if they were with loud speakers they were playing music they were singing BB king of Israel so no backing down either from the prime minister or his supporters quickly remind us what charges he's facing well the most serious charges bribery he's accused of using his power to pull strings with government regulations to help a media mogul make hundreds of millions of dollars and in exchange getting secret control over a leading news website he allegedly got to dictate what headlines and articles would appear and that apparently went on for years including he was running for reelection and then he's also charged with fraud and breach of trust for other alleged deals with other media moguls and Netanyahu's defense here is that the charge is totally bogus no leader in the history of democracy has ever been accused of bribery for press coverage what is expected for how the trial will play out and whether it will affect Netanyahu's new term in office well today the toenails lawyers argued that they need about a year and a half just to go over all the evidence and prepare before the trial can actually start in full swing and then when it does the entire trial could take a couple years more there are hundreds of witnesses his former aides may testify against him in court and he doesn't have to step down until a final conviction in the Supreme Court appeal if there is one so for years you know he will try to project in this as usual but every move he makes every decision he makes as a leader there will be speculation you know is he trying to distract from his trial this is never happened before an Israeli prime minister facing a criminal trial and also running a country at the same time what does this say about where Israel is right now but on the one hand I think it says it is a strong message that no one is above the law in Israel not even the prime minister on the other hand it's on you know is sending the message that he is an exception you know other senior officials who were indicted on corruption charges have resigned Netanyahu refuses and you know it shows that he is strong politically his political opposition is weak none of this for years all these bribery allegations none of it brought down that's on you know

Jerusalem Israel Benjamin
"us court appeals" Discussed on The Chad Prather Show

The Chad Prather Show

14:03 min | 1 year ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on The Chad Prather Show

"Anyway. Yeah I agree with you. It's funny the the phraseology that that gets gets to be a big deal trends and it goes away because in the countries to you know we had Russia. We had you here. Haiti you this Puerto Rico deal you know. Trump is evil racist for withholding aid after Hurricane Maria and now they're finding like seven eight nine warehouses full of supplies over there that they've been store housing and warehousing over there. Just it's a bad look but everybody hated trump Puerto Rico then it was a Russian collusion and then it was is Ukraine and down the line all these different things and then of course you had the Bribery you had quid pro quo. All these different words does that become big words like collusion. Everybody's on everybody's I mean. No one's ever use the phrase quid pro quo. You have good your lawyer but nobody else nobody ever sits around. I sent an analog when you make sandwich or else it pro quo I want to are you engaging in quid pro quo. Nobody does that. There's also there's nothing like inherently bad or nefarious about a quid pro quo politics all the time like literally in Congress in the context context passing legislation is a pretty well known concept that every high school civics learns called log-rolling which is where someone some legislator pork pork barrel. Suspending is one legislator agrees to do something in exchange for another legislator obviously that inevitably ends up entailing more spending beer government. I'm not defending on the merits but it is historically historically and pragmatically a day to day reality of what happens in the US Congress so this happens all the time. Well I'm just enjoying all of this senatorial pettifogging that's going. Yeah it's it's pretty pretty enamelling for me. But I thought I felt like and we'll get off this impeachment thing here in a second but I felt like they laid out what two days of stuff the left did or at least the house managers and then trump's lawyers take about two hours and just dismantle the thing I believe in the first half hour. Did you feel that that was adequate enough with what was said there. Yeah to be honest with you Chad. You Probably Watch more than I did. It sounds like I I I read I redback. Okay Yeah I I called the highlights. I pass a Bologna is a great attorney. I think he did a good job. look the outcome of this is for deigned okay. The president is is going to be acquitted. It's just a it's just a question of whether they get collins or Murkowski or maybe whether Joe Manchin or Chris Cinema or Doug Jones may maybe cross over to vote with Mitch McConnell but other than the exact tally the presence getting acquitted. We know how this is GonNa and the only the only questions are are they going to call witnesses. How long is this crap? Show going to play out. How much more time is going to be wasted? And who he's going to switch those. Those are the questions. Let's move on. You got a new article this Out where you're talking about the current pronouns. They tell us talk about that. Because this Pronoun thing is something I love to make fun of. Yeah what the current what are the. What are what's going on right now? What's trending let's get back to that phrase saw the basis for this was actually an opinion on the on the court here that that I clerked workforce of the? US Court appeals for the fifth circuit. Which is here in Texas Louisiana and Mississippi had an opinion earlier this month? The United States versus Barner was the case where where a divided panel to Republican nominee judges the majority Democrat nominee judge in the descent where one of the actual live issues. I think this is the first time it happened. And before that court was a litigant who was a biological male but formerly move at the court address him using female pronouns so the court had to decide on this and the majority said No. We're not going to do this. and they used male pronouns. The dissenting judge indulged in this gender DIS Fauria and said that we will do it and actually use female pronouns so you just it's really fascinating to see like this culture. Were issue that you and I. In the day to day monthly politics see every day on twitter and not reach federal judiciary so you have a piece national review today talking about that and What can I say I mean? We're talking about truth Chad. We're talking we're talking about biological truth like there are two sexes. Okay there's x chromosome and there's X Y chromosome this complicated like I learned this crap in middle the school biology. I'm no biologist. I'm no scientist but I know that there are two sexes and like in the opinion. Judge Duncan for the majority. WHO's a wonderful judge based in Louisiana? He takes this five by nine matrix that he borrowed from the LGBTQ whatever center at the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee showing all the variations nations of transgender pronouns and he literally inserts it into the opinion as a way to basically dismiss it. And say. WE'RE NOT GONNA WE'RE NOT GONNA do. This is crazy. Yeah and Josh says it so eloquently everything. Josh says his eloquent now me. I'm here's why I put it if I'm in the backseat with you and we're making out and I put my hand down in your pants. I'm going to be very angry or very happy. Depending on what I find and I'm only going to find one of two things period there's no other variations for made that determines your gender. I have to put my hand down your pants. I really don't but there's only two things you're gonNA find. What are you rolling your eyes about Steve? You know exactly exactly how I explained things that make perfectly good logical sense. Yes it does it does there. It is and I know people watching this thing or listened to it and they think why do we care. Why do we care? Why do we care? Why do we care? Why do we care? Let's let's let's answer that question. What's your opinion Josh? Why does why does it matter that we care about how somebody else the like what you're describing? Yeah so there are two maybe three reasons why I think we really should care. One is the truth. Inherently is worth defending okay. Truth should be defended for the sake of truth. I mean that's kind of historic speak in the entire purpose of debate in the in Kademi going back to Socrates Aristotle back to all the ancients they literally engage in the socratic dialogue in order to reach the truth so if we feel like we have the truth and is worth depending named for its own sake second. Language cannot change this much and this drastically and remain viable now. Some words can change meaning over time of course and plenty of words change meaning over time like for example Decimate the word decimate back in the day the The the letters D. E. C. mean ten so it was little to take out one out of ten of the opposing military. Today just means more generally wipeouts so words can change their meaning but what were words as basic as pronouns like the building blocks of distinguishing as you quite aptly put it between a male and female genitalia that cannot change inch and words like that just cannot change the English language to be valuable and I think the third and probably the most important reason why it's important for us to draw our line on this. There were actually really bad side effects to the transgender movement. We saw here in Texas with James Younger we are encouraging the premature preteen sexualization of children. We are encouraging in children to choose their own gender engaging in oftentimes irreversible hormonal tampering chemical. Castration frankly is really. What's going on here? There are really there are corrosive actual real life effects of this too. If you control the language you control the culture and that's a big thing and you're right. I couldn't didn't agree. I mean stamp of approval times deck. Ten you know deficit. So here's my thing. I mean you look at linen linens like Eric we gotta we gotTa control the Vladimir Lenin. We've got to control the population. We've got to control the way people think let's just put out our own publication our own newspaper. We'll call it truth. It's not it's propaganda but will use language will use rhetoric us. You know to make people to control the way people think on these things you've got to fight back on this deal and it has gotten serious. I mean if you miss gender somebody in the UK you could go to prison. It's I I mean in New York City New York City as become that way it's crazy. It's absolutely ludicrous. So you gotta fight this stuff. So if I'm if I WANNA be a she'd Natalie routes I mean remember when on Saturday night live. It was just pat. We were walking through the other day and there was a pat and there was a push a luggage cart right there. And Steve Steve Sure enough he turns around Looks Amigos Juicy that Pat. You don't know right you don't know yeah a more general. I was just thinking a while ago by the statement you made. There's probably a bunch of Morphou deitz right now gathering during together and GonNa throw their outrage on you. Yeah it's okay all right okay. Scare them chat now. I'm really not not man. I I don't know I I think we it's like somebody just threw it into overdrive in. Just just or hyper drive. And you would just zooming into the insanity and trying trying to normalize the crazy I mean. Let me clarify one thing. Hopefully that this goes without saying okay. I've never experienced JEN. Dispora with what psychologists psychiatrists call for you people who have this it sounds it. Sounds pretty confusing an awful so we should have you know are are Jewish and Christian cell should have compassion hundred individuals but ah the remedy for that is not to indulge in this it is to encourage them to seek help and to fight back against all the other pernicious effects that we were talking. The correct me if I'm wrong but the suicide rate after someone goes through a change does not drop exactly. Yeah I I think it gets worse I mean in my piece. Yeah site today Dr Paul McKee who was formerly at the top dog cares title Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore when he top hospitals wasn't the country and he's been opposing transgender sex reassignment surgery. If you WANNA call it for years now on these grounds like does not actually help the people that purports to help them and then you have on it kind of started. The Joe Rogan thinks started trending over the weekend because he came out and said I'd probably vote for Bernie early sanders because so on so forth and then Bernie kind of trumpeted that and then a CNN came out and said well Rogan. WHO's known I'm for his racist Homophobic transphobic remarks which give me a break up like go to sue him? Get whatever Nick Sandman left on the table. Get the rest of the money but I'm sure people would watch this US talking about this and they would say well we're TRANSPHOBIC I. Well no I mean I have compassion for you if you're going through it. This is a major thing. Johns Hopkins University has said. This is a mental illness rather than promoting this. If if let's say a person has schizophrenia area. And they don't know who they are. They're they've got multiple personalities popping in and out all the time. I want to see that person. Get the right help because that's not a healthy way to go through life if you have one anatomy one by and by the way folks. Biology is not bigotry. Don't get that confused. It's not bigotry. It science and Indus if you have this turmoil going on inside of yourself that you don't know who you are..

US Josh Congress Trump Steve Steve Puerto Rico Joe Rogan Haiti Bernie kind Russia Hurricane Maria Johns Hopkins University Bribery US Court twitter Judge Duncan Ukraine Mitch McConnell president
"us court appeals" Discussed on MSNBC Morning Joe

MSNBC Morning Joe

12:07 min | 1 year ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on MSNBC Morning Joe

"Hungry and you fed red meat. I was a stranger and you welcomed me. When I say we've got a unified the American people? It doesn't mean pretending that we're all the same. It means unifying around issues news from wages and family leave to gun violence in immigration Eddie how how's he doing as he's trying to sort of approach And a segment of the population that polls show that he just suffers he. I think the campaign is making a concerted effort. He just sat down recently. Green Live Christian Church with Reverend Marlboro Lineup. He's making do he did fairly well. I think it's important for him to talk about these policy issues in a way that really speak to black communities but I think we have to understand this in two ways one is that he has to connect with black voters in to he has is to be seen as someone who can deliver policy policy initiatives that will address the circumstances of black communities that is to say that it's not just simply about appealing to emotion emotion it's pandering to black communities actually about policies on the ground and I think this is really important going back to our earlier discussion when we use these political labels of liberal and progressive and centrist and conservative and the like we might be I think overstating the matter it might bear will be the case that what people are looking for is change that we're still in a chain cycle and the idea of political labels kind of defining how we want change may actually get us into some in trouble and so you might have someone who's liberal centrist progressive all of them you don't change and so it seems to me that if Joe Biden doesn't understand that if people to just doesn't understand that Elizabeth Warren doesn't they're all to find themselves in a situation and Jim Vander High Axiom is also looking at African American men as a focus focus for for Democrats tell us about it in the last election you had African American turnout decrease for the first time in twenty years which is concerning for Democrats and at the same time you had thirteen percent of African American men vote for trump I think it was four percent of African American women voted for him and so you have a lot of the campaigns buddha the judge booker others who are reaching out specifically to African American men to see if they can connect and also the Jack Up turnout get make sure that if there is higher higher turnout that African American men are voting for voting for Democrats and I think what Eddie said was really really important I do think that the biggest indicator of who wins nominations who wins the presidency are the people who are most sort of comfortable in their skin who voters of all different types feel like are the real deal and are authentic fantasy and people are much easier to sort of shift the shape of their ideology than we might think I think that was a great lesson of Donald Trump look at all the things Republicans now believe I believe that we would have thought unthinkable for five years ago. I don't know that that dynamic is that much different inside the Democratic Party if the right person can connect if the right person can can seem like an authentic person who could be trump and lead to some sort of change. I Jim Vanda I thank you very much. The meet the press. Chuck Todd Cast. It's an insider's take on politics. The twenty twenty election and more candid conversations with some of my favorite reporters about things we. We usually discuss off camera. Listen for free. Wherever you get your podcast welcome back to morning Joe joining us now as MSNBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos so we'll get into some of the legal headlines this morning a US district judge denied the Justice Department's request for a stay on testimony? From former White House counsel Don mcgann in a seventeen page opinion judge Catania. Brown Jackson rejected the department's attempts to hold off her earlier. Ruling requiring again to appear before congressional investigators. Judge Jackson action argued that quote further. Delay of the judiciary. Committee's enforcement of it's valid. Subpoena Causes Grave harm to both the committee's investigation negation and the interests of the public. More broadly the judge also decided to lift a temporary stay. She issued last week while while the case case involving mcgann moved up to the. US Court appeals that hearing scheduled for January third. So Danny will we hear from Don mcgann. How long does this take take? It may take longer than you think. Now the judge decided that win. Well give you an example when losers at a court want the court to not put the order into effect they asked for what's called a stay and get a stay. You need to show that it's really likely you're going to win and you're gonNA suffer some real serious harm if the court doesn't stop disorder disorder to from going in to remind us what's holding him back from talking well. The White House has indicated that they don't want him to testify and so that's what the DOJ is going to be appealing. And that's why we may not hear from again anytime soon because the appeal is going to go up to the circuit court and this may be delayed even further. And why might it be that. The White House wouldn't want him to testify. Did we get hints in the report. We did dumb again was a central figure in the Muller report as someone who was very close to Donald Trump and now happy and not happy yes and he knows a lot of things. He's spoken to the president on many occasions. He is featured prominently in the mall. Report if you are the House Democrats. He is somebody that you would want to hear from. Joe Is it possible to never hear from Don mcgann anything's possible and trump's Washington. But Danny the stay was lifted. Why can't the Democrats move quickly now to try to get him to the hill before January the third they contri- but what we're finding with congressional subpoena power is that it's very powerful on paper but when it actually comes to enforcement it really becomes more an issue of compromise mice so congress care? The house can try. But that may result in more legal battles and more appellate court. Danny Dante. What's it? What's the Justice Department's next move so they lost this day was lifted? She's saying you have to testify. It is in the interest of Congress and the public more. Generally if Congress now tries to compel Don mcgann to testify. What their next legal move? It's more than that. Congress could even use some of its inherent power to actually go get Don mcgann and bring him to the Capitol building. But they're not likely to do that. Because as I've said in most cases subpoenas in court cases are a question of enforcement you can send out the US. Marshall Service you can send out deputies to go bring somebody nobody to the courthouse. That doesn't happen. The same way in Congress and more often than not it becomes an issue of compromise and negotiation. So you're right you're absolutely right. The Watergate Hey toe and Danny and Watergate didn't didn't Congress actually threaten to imprison some of Nixon's aides who were refusing to comply with the subpoena subpoenas. That's right that's exactly what happened in Watergate and that could happen here but we've also seen historically that Congress doesn't I want to go to that level whether it's how Republicans or Democrats that is an extreme measure and what that means functionally. It's that Congress's power to subpoena. Subpoena may be brought on paper but in practice. It's really not all that brought but see and that's the thing Danny in practice administrations like the trump administration have completely stripped them of that power. We saw the same thing at times with the Obama Administration. I guess my question question is why wouldn't Congress exercise their Article One powers they have a court ruling that supportive of them and say Don mcgann. Hey Don on a federal judge has told you you have to testify and they. They rejected the stay of the DOJ. So done you've got two choices offices. You can either come testify willingly. Are we're going to send marshals after you and if you continue to they do it. We're we're we may even take the extraordinary measure that they took during Watergate and possibly Jelly for ignoring a federal judge's order and I it Dan Lewis. I bring this up is there are so many people. It was the Republican Party that I heard during the Obama Administration that was frustrated at people. Just ignoring congressional appeanas. Now you're seeing the same thing on the other side so yes. The practice actually stripped Congress the legislative branch of of its powers. So so why not make a point with Dan began. They've got a ruling in their favor. Because Don mcgann isn't actually averse necessarily two House Democrats threats. It's a strange situation. Because mcgann is nominally represented by the government the executive branch but their interests aren't perfectly aligned Don mcgann essentially says reason to lean on him Danny all the more reason. We're talking about precedent here. Why doesn't Congress lean on this guy? I and set a precedent. They could and they might decide strategically. That's the right thing to do. But they also risked turning don mcgann who maybe a favorable witness for Democrats Democrats into an adversarial hostile witness but they certainly can exercise their power and try to do that immediately. If they want to. Makeup or the precedent it would be worth it. Even if Don mcgann became a hassle because these subpoenas have been ignored for years exciting Democratic Administrations Astray Shins and Republican administrations alike and subpoena power of the United States. Congress has been made meaningless through the years they have have a federal judges ruling. They have a responsibility. Now to enforce that subpoena by any means legal means possible. Well now to this to associates. It's of Rudy. Giuliani are likely to be hit with more charges. In addition to the ones they are already facing for allegedly funneling foreign money into US political candidates that disclosure was made during a court hearing in New York related to the case of love Parnis and Ebor fruman the do hello was arrested last month for violating campaign finance laws. They have pleaded not guilty. Giuliani has acknowledged that Parnis and fruman assisted in his efforts to dig up dirt on the Biden's prosecutor sees thousands of files data and dozens of cell phones from partisan Zain from men as well as two other to Yanni associates charged in the case. David Korea and Andre Qiutian. A prosecutor told the court Monday parnassus has not provided the passwords to his phone despite numerous requests and the FBI is using its technology to try and lock the phones owns. And what Danny Civil Tzavellas might be unlocked in all us. What these two characters and Rudy Giuliani himself? Prosecutors and defense attorneys. He's like wish it was back in the nineteen nineties before the data era and terabytes and gigabytes of information that are contained just in phones or laptop computers. There's but that's the kind of thing that reveals everything about somebody's life and some prosecutors in sifting through all this evidence may be uncovering more information damaging aging to these defendants. But I have to say. I'm a little surprised because I'm more expected that there would be a rush to a guilty plea and a cooperation agreement not more charges that signals to me that if there are more charges coming that perhaps there isn't a cooperation agreement in the mix at least today and and Rudy Giuliani continues to to raise questions as to whether or not he'll be charged with something does he not..

Don mcgann Congress Danny Democrats Joe Biden United States Donald Trump White House Rudy Giuliani DOJ Brown Jackson Watergate Justice Department Obama Administration US Court Live Christian Church Democratic Party Eddie Danny Civil Tzavellas Jim Vanda
Kentucky clerk who refused same-sex marriage licenses can be sued

KYW 24 Hour News

00:41 sec | 1 year ago

Kentucky clerk who refused same-sex marriage licenses can be sued

"A former county clerk in Kentucky who gained international attention over her refusal to grant marriage licenses to same sex couples has lost another court appeal the latest from CBS news correspondent Jim crystal a federal appeals court has upheld a ruling requiring the state of Kentucky to pay nearly two hundred thirty thousand dollars in legal fees they are related to former Rowan county clerk Kim Davis is refused to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples in twenty fifteen two years later a federal judge ruled Kentucky must pay the legal fees of couples who sued Davis she spent several days in jail for ignoring a court order Davis was defeated last fall Jim chrysalis

Kentucky Kim Davis Jim Chrysalis CBS Jim Crystal Rowan County Two Hundred Thirty Thousand Do Twenty Fifteen Two Years
Kentucky clerk who refused same-sex marriage licenses, sued

WBBM Evening News

00:38 sec | 1 year ago

Kentucky clerk who refused same-sex marriage licenses, sued

"A former county clerk in Kentucky who gained international attention over her refusal to grant marriage licenses to same sex couples has lost another court appeal a federal appeals court has upheld a ruling requiring the state of Kentucky to pay nearly two hundred thirty thousand dollars in legal fees they are related to former Rowan county clerk Kim Davis is refusal to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples in twenty fifteen two years later a federal judge ruled Kentucky must pay the legal fees of couples who sued Davis she spent several days in jail for ignoring a court order Davis was defeated last fall Jim chrysalis

Kentucky Kim Davis Jim Chrysalis Rowan County Two Hundred Thirty Thousand Do Twenty Fifteen Two Years
Sandy Hook parents lose state court appeal against Newtown over school shooting

WCBS Programming

00:27 sec | 1 year ago

Sandy Hook parents lose state court appeal against Newtown over school shooting

"A Connecticut appeals court has upheld a lower judge's decision throwing out a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the parents of two sandy hook shooting victims the parents of students Jesse Lewis and no Posner sued new town and its school district claiming school officials failed order a lockdown after the gunman shot his way into the elementary school there should also fall to the school for only having locks on the outside the classroom

Posner Connecticut Jesse Lewis
Sandy Hook parents lose state court appeal against Newtown over school shooting

Michael Wallace and Steve Scott

00:24 sec | 1 year ago

Sandy Hook parents lose state court appeal against Newtown over school shooting

"I Connecticut appeals court has upheld the lower judge's decision throwing out a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the parents of two sandy hook shooting victims the parents of students Jesse Lewis and know what Posner sued new town and its school district claiming school officials failed to order a lockdown after the gunman shot his way into the elementary school there sued also faulted the school for only having locks on the outside of classroom

Jesse Lewis Posner Connecticut
Bill Cosby appeals conviction over testimony from other accusers

Lance McAlister

00:30 sec | 1 year ago

Bill Cosby appeals conviction over testimony from other accusers

"Bill cosby appealed his sexual assault conviction today asserting he has been wrongly convicted of assaulting envious constant bill cosby filed his appeal with the pennsylvania superior court appeal said cosby's conviction was not based on any credible evidence but on flawed erroneous in prejudice rulings cosby accused the court of abuse of discretion in allowing accusers other than constant to testify and the defense also said cosby's deposition from a civil case in which he admitted to sharing quayle's with women serve no purpose in the criminal case but to

Bill Cosby Quayle Assault Pennsylvania
"us court appeals" Discussed on Let's Get Civical

Let's Get Civical

04:20 min | 1 year ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on Let's Get Civical

"And that's how it's always. And that's how I was always been we've talked about in the past FDR did try to pack the supreme court with people up to like what was it sixteen? Ten fifteen justices. Yeah. So you know, had that past because of had a stick up. Wow. The her story. Oh, so how does the court decide which cases to take? I will walk you kind of threw it. So right now, there's thirteen appellate courts that sit below the supreme court, and they are called. The US court appeals. It's important to know that because a lot of cases at the supreme court decides to take are coming from the US court of appeals goes receives around give or take ten thousand petitions year, so many that's so many because they only take like on average eighty ish. Wow. Says a year. Wow. I know thirteen of course, being gerrymandering cases, not over it. Every once a year every. That's not a factual number. But we do take gerrymandering cases pretty much every year. Generally, when they're looking at cases, they're looking for cases that have quote unquote, national significance or situations where the nation is looking to the supreme court to set a precedent. Listen gerrymandering would be one of the. How it be nice to just have like like rules in place. You can't do these four things or it's a legal. Look, it's not I'm not on this court. But should I be? Yes. So that's that's what they're taking into consideration. So they're not looking at individual cases. And being like, yes, this person's constitutional violet like there was a constitutional violation for this one individual. If it doesn't set a precedent for cases in the future. They probably won't take it. And they only take cases when it involves the US constitution that has to be a constitutional violation of some kind or they they won't hear it. That's like the don't have standing in front of the court. You know what I mean? So that's how so that's what they're looking at when they're choosing cases. And general like the obviously the justices themselves aren't the ones sifting through the all of the applications, they they clerk day have staff. So they're only they're getting a very small Pinson executive summary. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And they decide the nine justices decide what to take. Yep. If you make it to the supreme court. So you've made it you've made been chosen. Down come on to funky town. You're the next contestant on the supreme yours you or not Hugh lawyers will make or uments. Yeah. The supreme court session begins on the first Monday of every October and goes until the Sunday before the first Monday of the following October. Dear I know I know I literally when I was figuring they thought it was like, wait a second. But then the next part is that they're in recess right? Like basically from late June early July until that first Monday. So they're like inception, but on recess so they're really only doing work from October to July or arguments are heard from October to April love, right? They are open to the public. Honey, we're going you're going baby go, and we'll keep you all posted on we're going. But like I'm pretty determined to you go arguments like I'm gonna freak out. They typically here two cases day with the day starting at ten AM. Mm me to kind of late on the island. I love you know, what I mean. I imagine starting at like seven, but they're just like no ten like, I would do them. Each case is allotted one hour arguments, and that is broken down into thirty minutes per side. However each side can decide not to use their full thirty minutes. The petitioner argues first, and then the respondent the petitioner can reserve some of their time for the end for a rebuttal. Yes, now, I'm so it's like, you're doing your argument. Right. And the time it's happening. They'll they'll be like totally do that. I feel like I wanna talk for ten to fifteen minutes almost what you have to say. I'm gonna answer. I totally do that justices often interrupt with questions the eat up a lot of the allotted thirty minute time slot. Yeah. So like you base against you feel like you're count. It's part of your thirty minutes. Yeah. Wow. So you start your argument on your like, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and you're like into it..

supreme court US FDR Pinson Hugh executive thirty minutes fifteen minutes thirty minute one hour
"us court appeals" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

04:01 min | 2 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"Host jordansekulow. Folks, a huge pro-life victory out of the fifth circuit court of appeals stay this is in Texas the opinion with live last night. With everything going on in the country right now, you may not have a see this reported yet. But if you are concerned about the defunding of Planned Parenthood. This is this is a big case initially Texas had decided to de-fund Planned Parenthood as part of its Medicaid program. Medicaid is a shared program between the federal government and states in the states put it at significant portions of funds taxpayer money into its state resources into Medicaid. Now. The district court said Texas could not de-fund Planned Parenthood through the Medicaid process that they didn't have the ability to do that. But in a bigger move today in what again that is all the same day that marchers are marching on the March for life in Washington DC as as they do on the on around the anniversary of the Roe versus Wade decision. Which is a officially on Monday. On the day of the March for life in Washington DC. We got a blog about that. ACL J dot org. Texas has. The Fisher court of appeals has ruled the Texas candy fund. Planned Parenthood is a huge loss to the nation's number one abortion provider and the number one abortion provider in the world. If you want to talk to a Sunday or the numbers one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten that's one eight hundred six eight four three one one zero on this again a day where life is celebrated it fought for the day of the March for life. And also at a time when I I'm not sure I've seen this yet. Any news outlet other than print media because of so bitch going on the shutdown. That's going on and everything else. That's happening dancey Pelosi's trippy, the play not being us all that the delegation. She's now respond all of this information. That's out there is that really breaking to the to the television media to the print media as well. And all the details about the case it happened to get last night. But I just want to be clear that the US court appeals for the fifth circuit. Said that the district court judge was wrong that three judge panel found that he used the incorrect state or review vacating the joke should that had blocked Texas from defunding Planned Parenthood. So at this point die play the state of Texas can move forward with the defunding of Planned Parenthood, and Harry this is significant at a time, but we know legislation is going to be tough to get through a divided congress. It was tough to get through even with Republicans control the house the Senate because there were enough senators to block any legislation to de-fund Planned Parenthood. This is significant because states could start if this decision holds, it'll it'll be appealed to the supreme court this Precourt will probably have to wait. And if they don't states will be able to make up their own decisions about if they're funding Planned Parenthood because the way it happens is through these Medicaid programs. I think you're absolutely right. This case underscores an important element of federalism. The state have a role in regulating health, and to some extent reproductive rights. So Jordan, the fifth circuit decision injected life into the state legislatures ability to curtail Planned Parenthood of the nation's leading abortion, abide her it a provider sorry in in a case involving video evidence Planned Parenthood was allegedly involved in the sale of fetal parts and the three judge panel in the fifth circuit has struck down of the district court's injunction. And I think this is very welcome news. It's also unique because out of the same circuit court, Louisiana. They said Louisiana could because it didn't.

Texas Medicaid Washington DC Texas candy fund Pelosi Louisiana US Jordan Senate Precourt Roe Harry Wade
"us court appeals" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

860AM The Answer

04:01 min | 2 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on 860AM The Answer

"Jordansekulow. Folks, a huge pro-life injury out of the fifth circuit court of appeals stay this is in Texas. The opinion went live last night. With everything going on in the country right now, you may not have a see this reported yet. But if you are concerned about the defunding of Planned Parenthood. This is this is a big case initially Texas had decided to defunding Planned Parenthood as part of its Medicaid program. Medicaid is the shared program between the federal government and states in the states put significant portions of funds taxpayer money into state resources into Medicaid. The district court said Texas could not defunding Planned Parenthood through the Medicaid process that they didn't have the ability to do that. But in a bigger move today in what again that is the same day that marchers are marching on the March for life in Washington DC as they do on the art around the anniversary of the Roe versus Wade decision. Which is a officially on Monday on the day of the March for life in Washington DC. We got a blog about that. A ACL J dot ORG, Texas has. The Fisher court of appeals has ruled the Texas candy fund play parenthood is a huge loss to the nation's number one abortion provider and the number one abortion provider in the world. If you want to talk to us on air, the number is one eight hundred six eight four thirty one ten that's one eight hundred six eight four three one one zero on this again a day where life is celebrated Ed fought for the day of the March for life. And also at a time when I'm not I'm not sure I've seen this yet in any news outlet other than print media because of so bitch shutdown that's going on and everything else. That's happening. Nancy, Pelosi's trippy, the play not be us all that the delegation. She's now responding all of this information is out there is that really breaking to the to the television media to the print media as well. And all the details about the case it happened to get last night. But I just want to make clear that the US court appeals for the fifth circuit. Said that the district court judge was wrong. Three judge panel found that he used the incorrect. Data review vacating the joke should that had blocked Texas from defunding Planned Parenthood. So at this point die. The state of Texas can move forward with the defunding of Planned Parenthood, and Harry this is significant at a time when we know legislation is going to be tough to get through a divided congress. It was tough to get through even with Republicans control the house and the Senate because there were senators to block any legislation really to defraud Planned Parenthood. This is significant because states could start if this decision holds, it'll it'll be appealed to the supreme court this Precourt will probably have to weigh in. If they don't states will be able to make up their own decisions about if their funding Planned Parenthood because the way it happens is through these Medicaid programs. I think you're absolutely right. This case underscores an important element of federalism. The state have a role in regulating health, and to some extent reproductive rights. So Jordan, the fifth circuit decision injected life into the state legislatures ability to curtail Planned Parenthood, the nation's leading abortion, abide her it provider sorry in a case involving video evidence. Planned Parenthood was allegedly involved in the sale of fetal parts and the three judge panel in the fifth circuit has struck down of the district court's injunction. And I think this is very welcome news. It's also unique because at the same circuit court in Louisiana. They said Louisiana couldn't because it didn't site enough.

Planned Parenthood Texas Nancy Medicaid Washington DC Louisiana US Jordan Pelosi Senate Precourt Ed Roe Harry Wade
Convicted Danish submarine killer loses court appeal

WBBM Evening News

00:32 sec | 2 years ago

Convicted Danish submarine killer loses court appeal

"The convicted killer of journalist Kim wall has lost his court appeal in Copenhagen Denmark. Danish submarine inventor Peter Madsen already guilty of the torture and murder of all Swedish reporter last year has lost his appeal against his life sentence. The prosecutor had argued that the life sentence should be upheld saying the motive was sexual and the crime was planned in Denmark. A life sentence is on average sixteen years, but can be extended if necessary that's in wants the time limited sentence. Not an open ended

Denmark Kim Wall Peter Madsen Murder Reporter Prosecutor Sixteen Years
Convicted Danish submarine killer loses appeal

Dennis Prager

00:32 sec | 2 years ago

Convicted Danish submarine killer loses appeal

"The convicted killer of journalists Kim wall has lost his Copenhagen court appeal. Charles de LA desma reports say dish submarine inventor. Peter Madsen already guilty of the torture and murder of all Swedish reporter last year has lost his appeal against his life sentence. The prosecutor had argued that the life sentence should be upheld saying the motive was sexual and the crime was planned in Denmark, a license is on average sixteen years, but can be extended if necessary that's and wants to time limited sentence. Not an open ended prison term.

Charles De La Desma Kim Wall Peter Madsen Copenhagen Prosecutor Denmark Murder Reporter Sixteen Years
"us court appeals" Discussed on WBAP 820AM

WBAP 820AM

07:24 min | 2 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on WBAP 820AM

"Five zero five four six two six would like to take a little bit of a look at he said, and she said because of course is the classic case that is now. Probably maybe possibly coming up on Capitol Hill, the charges made by Christine Blasi Ford and the defense against those charges by supreme court nominee Brett Cavanaugh. This is always a situation that needs to be judge of a case by case basis. Not every case certainly involves actual assaults. As million doubtedly have not every case is like the lacrosse team that was wrongly accused in at the Duke University. Every case is different. This particular case, we are talking about what is essentially a delaying tactic on the part of the Democrats to simply see if they cannot run out the clock and force the whole issue of the supreme court nomination passed the midterm elections. Starting with the fact that the ranking democrat on the judiciary committee, Dianne Feinstein was aware of this situation as far back as July shed a letter from Ford back then and did not bring it up until a last minute. Let's see have another chance at a at a big delay. That was brought forward. And so now, we we sit with this. And now, so the Republicans came forward and said all right fine. We'll hear from her. Well, no now, she doesn't want to be heard from until there is an FBI investigation. There is a process that takes place in situations like this, and there have already been six FBI investigations of bread Kavanagh over the years for from when he was in the executive branch as an assistant to George W Bush and other positions. One more as regards his appointment to the US court appeals for the district of Columbia where he currently sits. And then the sixth one in this particular case the supreme court nomination. This is not a casual way that that people are are examined the FBI does extremely thorough and very deep background investigations of people. I had a much lesser FBI investigation into my background just for a clearance. That is was above top secret. But it was certainly not at the level of we're talking about here. I heard from people I hadn't heard from this was when I was first in the army, I heard from people I hadn't heard from. So it's grade school who would contact me and say, hey, Jim, how's it going? Are you trouble? And I finally figured it out. What was happening and I suggest that they're doing an investigation of me for clearance. Tell them the truth. And that was all I had to say to the I got the clear at so, I suppose that must've all worked out. But again, we are not talking here about an issue of fairness or an issue of anything other than a political tactic. It is a delaying tactic that has been used. And so far, I must say for the Democrats, rather successfully. And how far this goes who knows? And how long it goes who knows? Republicans are considering whether to hire outside attorneys to question both cavenaugh and Christine Blasi Ford, assuming that she ever actually does show up on Capitol Hill. She's not yet indicated whether she will appear at a hearing at least that was the the initial word we had that's later changed to she would rather not show up until such time as there was a further FBI investigation. That's that's stalling. If she has something to say say it if not shut up. Again. There's no reason why this nomination should be held hostage by someone who has nothing to say. If you've got some say you've been given the opportunity show up and say it. She has said that she wants to cooperate with the Senate Judiciary committee. But that she's been the target of vicious harassment and even death threats that our family has relocated. Well, it's already out there. And while certainly such tactics are are to be condemned. Even though I'm sure Maxine Waters would have been quite thrilled with the notion because she is urged harassment of people from really what they do for what they represent, but it's not a right thing to do. But that doesn't alter the fact that her testimony is now being considered key to a serious case of the business of the country. The supreme court needs a full complement of justices, and this woman Christine Blasi Ford has something to say and quite frankly. There's nothing that she can say or not say that will change any. Harassment. She may have we live in an era of harassment made easy by digital means. And as a citizen. She owes it to the country to see whatever it is. She has to say, and then allow Brad Kavanagh to respond and at that time, then the process should move forward. But the notion of simply playing a stupid, politician drinks and constant delaying tactics is not something that is in the best interests of the country. And again, this is a case that needs to move forward one way or the other. Now, it has been noted that all eleven Republicans on the Senate Judiciary committee are men as if this somehow is disqualifying on their part. They would have to of course, interrogate Ford about her accusation that Cavanaugh groped her and attempted to rip off reclosed at a high school party early nineteen eighties. Republicans could avoid the uncomfortable questioning by hiring outside counsel to do it Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas says that option is being discussed even about site attorneys were to be hired. Gordon, says senators could still ask questions assuming of course, that the ever actually get the opportunity to ask questions. One eight six six five O JIMBO is our number one eight six six five zero five four six two six we'd like your take on this. It is a classic. She said he said situation. But at the moment is holding up the nation's business, and it has come this far. Certainly it isn't as though Christine Blasi Ford never had any inkling of the notion that this might be public. She wrote a letter to the ranking democrat on the Senate Judiciary committee Dianne Feinstein in August. She hired an attorney in August. She took a polygraph test. And she certainly has a considerable idea of what it is that she needs to say, and one would hope that it will be the truth. But it certainly does not need to be. I'm going to sit back in the corner. Pout? He's come this far. It's time to say whatever she has to say or to to back off from any charges.

Christine Blasi Ford FBI harassment Senate Judiciary committee Dianne Feinstein Ford judiciary committee Brett Cavanaugh Brad Kavanagh Senate Judiciary Duke University US Senator John Cornyn Maxine Waters Columbia George W Bush Jim attorney Texas
"us court appeals" Discussed on Talk 650 KSTE

Talk 650 KSTE

07:57 min | 2 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on Talk 650 KSTE

"Six five zero five four six two six like to take a little bit of a look at he said, and she said because of course is the classic case that has now. Probably maybe possibly coming up on Capitol Hill, the charges made by Christine Blasi Ford and the defense against those charges by supreme court nominee Brett Kavanagh. This is always a situation that needs to be judged on a case by case basis. Not every case certainly involves actual assaults. As million doubtedly have not every case is like the lacrosse team. But was wrongly accused in a at Duke University. Every case is different. In this particular case, we are talking about what is essentially a delaying tactic on the part of the Democrats to simply see if they cannot run out the clock and force the whole issue of the supreme court nomination passed the midterm elections. Just starting with the fact that the ranking democrat on the judiciary committee Dianne Feinstein was aware of the situation as far back as July shit a letter from Ford back then and did not bring it up until a last minute. Let's have another chance at a at a big delay. That was brought forward. And so now, we we sit with this. And now, so the Republicans came forward and said all right fine. We'll hear from her. Well, no now, she doesn't want to be heard from until there is a an FBI investigation. There is a process that takes place in situations like this, and there have already been six FBI investigations of bread Cavanaugh over the years four from when he was in the executive branch as an assistant to George W Bush and other positions. One more as regards his appointment to the US court appeals for the district of Columbia where he currently sits. And then the sixth one in this particular case the supreme court nomination. This is not a casual way that that people are are examined the FBI does extremely thorough and very deep background investigations of people. I had a much lesser FBI investigation into my background just for clearance. That is was above top secret. But it was certainly not at the level that we're talking about here. I heard from people I hadn't heard from this was when I was first in the army, I heard from people I hadn't heard from. So it's grade school who would contact me and say, hey, Jim, how's it going? Are you in trouble? And I finally figured it out. What was happening? And I said just that they're doing an investigation of me for clearance. Tell them the truth, and the that was all I had to say to the I got the clearance. So I suppose that must've all worked out. But again, we are not talking here about an issue of of fairness or an issue of anything other than a political tactic. It is a delaying tactic that has been used. And so far, I must say for the Democrats, rather successfully. And how far this goes who knows? And how long it goes who knows? Republicans are considering whether to hire outside attorneys to question both cavenaugh and Christine Blasi Ford, assuming that she ever actually does show up on Capitol Hill. She's not yet indicated whether she will appear at a hearing at least that was the the initial word we had that's later changed to a she would rather not show up until such time as there was a further FBI investigation. That's that's stalling. If she has something to say say it if not shut up. Again. There's no reason why this nomination should be held hostage by someone who has nothing to say. If you've got something to say you've been given the opportunity show up and say it. She has said that she wants to cooperate with the Senate Judiciary committee. But that she is with the target of vicious harassment and even death threats of that our family has relocated. Well, it's already out there. And while certainly such tactics are are to be condemned. Even though I'm sure Maxine Waters would have been quite thrilled with the notion because she is urged harassment of people from really what they do for what they represent, but it's not a right thing to do. But that doesn't alter the fact that her testimony is now being considered key to a serious case of the business of the country. The supreme court needs a full complement of justices, and this woman Christine Bazi Ford has something to say and quite frankly. There's nothing that she can say or not say that will change any harassment. She may have we live in an era of harassment made easy by digital means. And as a citizen. She owes it to the country to say, whatever it is. She has to say amend allow Brad Kavanagh to respond and at that time, then the process should move forward. But the notion of simply playing a stupid politician tricks and constant delaying tactics is not something that is in the best interests of the country. And again, this is a case that needs to move forward one way or the other. Now, it has been noted that all eleven Republicans on the Senate Judiciary committee are men as if somehow is disqualifying on their part, they would have to of course, interrogate Ford about her Accu sation that cavenaugh groped her and attempted a rip reclosed with a high school party in the early nineteen eighties. Republicans could avoid the uncomfortable questioning by hiring outside counsel to do it Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas says that option is being discussed even about side attorneys were to be hired Cornyn says senators could still ask questions assuming of course, that they ever actually get the opportunity to ask questions. One eight six six five O JIMBO is our number one eight six six five zero five four six two six we'd like your take on this. It is a classic. She said he said situation. But at the moment is holding up the nation's business, and it has come this far. Certainly it isn't as though Christine Blasi Ford never had any inkling of the notion that this might be published. She wrote a letter to the ranking democrat on the Senate Judiciary committee Dianne Feinstein in August, she hired an attorney in August. She took a polygraph test. And she certainly has a considerable idea of what it is that she needs to say, and one would hope that it will be the truth. But it certainly does not need to be. I'm going to sit back in the corner and pout she's come this far. It's time to say whatever she has to say.

Christine Blasi Ford FBI Senate Judiciary committee harassment Dianne Feinstein Ford Senate Judiciary lacrosse Duke University Senator John Cornyn Brett Kavanagh Brad Kavanagh US Maxine Waters Columbia George W Bush Jim Cavanaugh Texas
"us court appeals" Discussed on WTMJ 620

WTMJ 620

07:59 min | 2 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on WTMJ 620

"Five zero five four six two six like to take a little bit of a look at. He said she said because of course is the classic case that is now. Probably maybe possibly coming up on Capitol Hill, the charges made by Christine Blasi Ford and the defense against those charges by supreme court nominee Brett Cavanaugh. This is always a situation that needs to be judged on a case by case basis. Not every case certainly involves actual assaults as video doubtedly have not every case is like the lacrosse team. But was wrongly accused in at Duke University. Every case is different. In this particular case, we are talking about what is essentially a delaying tactic of the part of the Democrats to simply see if they cannot run out the clock and force the whole issue of the supreme court nomination passed the midterm elections. Starting with the fact that the Iraqi democrat on the judiciary committee Dianne Feinstein was aware of this situation as far back as July shit a letter from Ford back then and did not bring it up until a last minute. Let's have another chance at a at a big delay. That was brought forward. And so now we sit with this. And now, though the Republicans came forward and said all right fine. We'll hear from her. Well, no now, she doesn't want to be heard from until there's an FBI investigation. There is a process that takes place in situations like this, and there have already been six FBI investigations of bread Cavanaugh over the years four from when he was in the executive branch as an assistant to George W Bush and other positions. One more as regards his appointment to the US court appeals for the district of Columbia where he currently sits. And then the sixth one in this particular case the supreme court nomination. This is not a casual way that that people are are examined the FBI does extremely thorough and very deep background investigations of people. I had a much lesser FBI investigation into background just for clearance that was above top secret. But it was certainly not at the level that we're talking about here. I heard from people I hadn't heard from this was when I was first in the army, I heard from people I hadn't heard from. So it's grade school who would contact me and say, hey, Jim, how's it going? Are you in trouble? And I finally figured it out. What was happening? And I said just that they're doing an investigation of me for clearance. Tell them the truth at the that was all I had to say I got the clear at so I suppose that must've all worked out. But again, we are not talking here about. An issue of fairness or an issue of anything other than a political tactic. It is a delaying tactic that has been used. And so far, I must say for the Democrats that rather successfully. And how far this goes who does? And how long it goes who knows? Republicans are considering whether to hire outside attorneys to question both cabinet and Christine Blasi Ford, assuming that she ever actually does show up on Capitol Hill. She's not yet indicated whether she will appear at a hearing at least that was the the initial word we had that's later changed to a she would rather not show up until such time as there was a further FBI investigation. That's that's stalling. If she has something to say say it if not shut up. Again. There's no reason why this nomination should be held hostage by someone who has nothing to say. If you've got something to say you've been given the opportunity show up and say it. She has said that he wants to cooperate with the Senate Judiciary committee. But that she's with the target of vicious harassment and even death threats of that our family has relocated. Well, it's already out there. And while certainly such tactics are are to be condemned. Even though I'm sure Maxine Waters would have been quite thrilled with the notion because she's urged harassment of people from really what they do for what they represent, but it's not a right thing to do. But that doesn't alter the fact that her testimony is now being considered key to a serious case of the business of the country. The supreme court needs a full complement of justices, and this woman Christine Blasi Ford has something to say and quite frankly. There's nothing that she can say or not say that will change any harassment. You may have we live in an era of harassment made easy by digital means. And as a citizen. She owes it to the country to see whatever it is. She has to say, and then allow Brad Kavanagh to respond and at that time, then the process should move forward. But the notion of simply playing a stupid politician tricks and council delaying tactics is not something that is in the best interests of the country. And again, this is a case that needs to move forward one way or the other. Now, it has been noted that all eleven Republicans on the Senate Judiciary committee are men as if somehow is disqualified on their part. They would have to of course, interrogate Ford about her accusation that cavenaugh groped her and attempted a rip off close at a high school party in the early nineteen eighties. Republicans could avoid the uncomfortable questioning by hiring outside counsel to do it Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas says that option is being discussed even outside attorneys were to be hired. Gordon, says senators could still ask questions assuming of course, that they ever actually get the opportunity to ask questions. One eight six six five zero JIMBO is our number one eight six six five zero five four six two six we'd like your take on this. It is a classic. She said he said situation. But at the moment is holding up the nation's business, and it has come this far. Certainly it isn't as though Christine Blasi Ford never had any inkling of the notion that this might be published. She wrote a letter to the ranking democrat on the Senate Judiciary committee Dianne Feinstein in August, she hired an attorney in August. She took a polygraph test. Edgy certainly has a considerable idea of what it is that she needs to say, and one would hope that it will be the truth. But it certainly does not need to be. I'm going to sit back in the corner. Pout? She's come this far. It's time to say whatever she has to say or to to back off from any charges one.

Christine Blasi Ford FBI Senate Judiciary committee harassment Dianne Feinstein Ford Brett Cavanaugh Senate Judiciary lacrosse Duke University attorney US Brad Kavanagh Maxine Waters Columbia Senator John Cornyn George W Bush Jim Texas
"us court appeals" Discussed on Talk 650 KSTE

Talk 650 KSTE

04:42 min | 2 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on Talk 650 KSTE

"Slash save so we got this huge announcement tonight amount president trump's nominee four the highest court in the land just so we're all clear what are some of the differences between some of those candidates who were close remember even just because one is going to get name doesn't mean that another won't get named later on you could have another opening in this presidencies i wanted to talk to you a bit about some of the the differences in the top three such as they are and then also what we can expect once we get another conservative seated on the high court alba's through that we have atom white with us he is hoover fellow and director of the center for the study of the administrative state at george mason university's antonin scalia school of law adam great to have you it's great to be here so i just we got these picks catholic cavenaugh and raymond what do you think i mean you know of the top choices right now and i'm actually not even sure that those are necessarily the big three but all of the big three what are the differences that we can see well let me cheat and talk about four cavenaugh judge amy coney barrett of notre dame raymond catholic from michigan us court of appeals for the sixth circuit and thomas hardiman federal judge in us court appeals for the third circuit i mean the list have been sort of fluid but also for those names have been bounded about now judges have a lot in common right they are all basically variations on on conservative judges and conservative jurisprudence and the records are colored in some ways by their experiences so far we don't know enough so that they agree or disagree so much as we know that some some of them have had a specific areas of focus where others haven't sort of brad kavanagh the dc circuit he's the one with the longest record he's been on the us court of appeals for the dc circuit since president george w bush put them there before that he worked in the bush white house and before that he was on ken starr's investigation of of the whitewater crimes during the clinton years so cavenaugh says he serves on the dc circuit has had a very regulation heavy dockets dc circuit gets a lot of regulatory in constitutional cases in cavenaugh shown a lot of respect for the constitution separation of powers imports a constitutional structure right and the importance of not del congress not delegating overbroad powers agencies or at least the courts not deferring to the agencies too much so that's that's an area of kavanagh's i emphasise and in terms of barrett by the way my my favorite choice what can you tell us about her jurisprudence bear it doesn't have much jurisprudence so to speak because she's only been on the us court of appeals for the seventh circuit since november she was appointed by trump but she does have nearly two decades really serious scholarship as a law professor at notre dame she's written widely on really fundamental questions of the respective roles of the court congress and so on she's written papers about what we lawyers call starry decisive which is another way of saying the weight of precedent she's written about notions of due process has also written sur famously or to the is the democrats infamously on the obligations or or challenges for a catholic judge and so she's written fewer judicial opinions but she's written very broadly and very deeply on these these fundamental questions of what it means to be a judge of what it means to have a constitution gotta last two catholic and hardiman they have a little more in common with one another they both have been on the us court of appeals again catholics on the sixth circuit from michigan hardiman third circuit from pittsburgh pennsylvania they have had more traditional legal careers they've been practicing lawyers they don't come from elite legal background so to speak hardiman with georgetown catholics went to michigan which some of seen as as being very appealing to president trump giving his his popularity in the rust belt the west and they've had traditionally touched on variety of issues not really emphasizing on one specific subject way the kavanagh's dc circuit docket sets up we've had a lot.

trump president two decades
"us court appeals" Discussed on WIBC 93.1FM

WIBC 93.1FM

04:22 min | 2 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on WIBC 93.1FM

"If you like your justice you can keep your justice as oh is that fair that i do that they'll have hearings tomorrow actually i don't know when they're well i'm just messing but not really remember elections have consequences being a consequences that's true that is so true i am just super super laffy just i have my pick i want i want justice willett who's on the texas supreme court justice i want him to take that seat i have the president's list the president said he's going to pick from a list of people the twenty five people from which he chose neal gorsuch right so let me just read them to you real quick amy coney barrett of indiana she's on the us court of appeals for the seventh circuit that's the that's the court by the way that just gave jeff sessions has big victory last night were concerned the chicago and the sanctuary city thing note that keith blackwell of georgia supreme court of georgia charles canadia florida supreme court florida steve steven colin of iowa us court of appeals for the eighth circuit alison eat of colorado us court of appeals for the tenth circuit brit grant of georgia supreme court of georgia raymond gruner of missouri us court appeals for the eighth circuit thomas hardiman of pennsylvania court of appeals for the third circuit brett cavanaugh of maryland us court of appeals for dc raymond catholic of michigan us court of appeals for cicket joan larson six circuit court mike lee united states senator by the way i'm totally against it i am totally against taking a senator when we're going to need said senator for confirmations nope no no no no no do not dilute our senate potency do not dilute do not dilute no moving on thomas lii supreme court of utah edward mansfield supreme court iowa frederico moreno who is us district court for southern district florida kevin newsome of alabama us court of appeals eleventh circuit william pryor eleventh circuit margaret ryan virginia us court of appeals for armed forces david strauss of minnesota eight circuit diane sykes wisconsin seven circuit i'm also part of kentucky six circuit timothy tim kovic of colorado tenth circuit robert young don willett justice willett of texas supreme quarter texas that's my pick don willett is my pick that is my pick i'm just saying this place that on the table is my pick happen and patrick why rick of supreme court of oklahoma just say that's got it there we have it all taken just you know no no just me well you can take a pick who who do you want their slick i think the two i'm going to pick one to pick number one i'm going to go with a moth apar for my number one and then my number correct answer is don redman okay great and then my number two is tom hardiman what is the matter with you like to disagree with you don willett i love his devotion to natural rights and he has a libertarian streak that's why i like him i like donald yes that that is not allowed as a choice because he's a senate and we do not dilute our senate potency true no dilution we need have why do you want to get rid of a senator when the margin so close figured we're up it were called the midterms dude mitt romney is shooting yeah but that's the other seat i know he's going to be the other senator it's gonna be me diluting it's going to be michael no it's going to be mike lee and mitch and mitch and mitt romney romney's not taking the seat okay it's a different seat so it would be a dilution so keith blackwell i'm just like all about don willett because he is a feisty conservative libertarian yeah texas why not i'm telling you i mean it takes his kids hunting i'm all about it totally fine an he actually knows what barbecue is unlike some of these people who say that new york actually makes barbecue and i'm like who you should never be elected to office he earns saying i'm totally for that so i'm all i'm all hands i mean that's i would like.

"us court appeals" Discussed on AM 870 The Answer

AM 870 The Answer

02:26 min | 2 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on AM 870 The Answer

"Right here eight hundred seventy the answer broadcast everyone we've been talking about international issues the first half hour now we're gonna talk about domestic issues that we're dealing with that the american center for law justice we're gonna talk about a case we mentioned the other day involving a major win at the us court appeals for the sixth circuit for religious freedom but also really for our national motto and that is in god we trust we'll talk about that but i also want to talk about our government accountability project let me let me tell you what this is we initiated several years ago and determination that we were going to file a freedom of information act requests on issues going to bring any conman harry hutchison into this conversation right away on issues we thought would be of concern to the american people where we think oversight is necessary we're congress can do oversight but the outside groups that can look in and maybe even dig deeper or go to court to compel the production of documents of necessary that's right and j in connection with that and and pursuant to that the acl jay has today a total of fifty one ongoing freedom of information act request these requests were sent to fifteen different government agencies eleven of the requests are impending litigation so there are actually ten lawsuits actual lawsuits acl j versus the department of state acl j versus the department of justice the fbi the treasury that are pending in united court in the district of columbia in which we are seeking information from these agencies to find out what went on in various matters and in various instances and a lot of this got initiated because of our litigation against the internal revenue service we followed a massive lawsuit representing on dozens of organizations that were unfairly targeted by the irs because of their conservative viewpoints because of their pro life positions even took some educational groups in this that we're talking about the constitution this was the targeting scandal from about three years ago four years ago we went to court on that ultimately got an injunction permanent junction in place a monetary damages and a companion case to the tune of about four million dollars and that was really was the impetus harry of starting a government accountability project inside the acl j there you had an agency the internal revenue service that.

american center harry hutchison congress jay treasury columbia irs us four million dollars three years four years
"us court appeals" Discussed on Super Station 101

Super Station 101

01:31 min | 3 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on Super Station 101

"And of all the things that you can do if you really are concerned about about about those issues i suppose the least productive thing you could possibly do is to kneel during the national anthem if there's any gesture you could make that is one hundred percent guaranteed to be futile it would be kneeling during the national anthem allen good point let's go to jeff in pennsylvania online to jeff welcome to the program good morning the your previous guest togan failed to mention that there is an active appeal to the three think in the us court appeals for the pennsylvania we districting case eighteen that's eighteen sixty the moore the schedule is now july second all appeals have to be in and right now they're trying to unblock review going on of a injunction pending appeal that would actually reverse the entire election that happened in pennsylvania because it was either legal for the supreme court to come up with a remedy that amended the constitution and the constitution and pennsylvania is very slow it is delivered it has to be don twice and requires.

pennsylvania jeff us one hundred percent
"us court appeals" Discussed on Super Station 101

Super Station 101

01:30 min | 3 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on Super Station 101

"Of all the things that you can do if you really are concerned about about about those issues i suppose the least productive thing you could possibly do is to kneel during the national anthem i if there's any gesture you could make that is one hundred percent guaranteed to be futile it would be kneeling during the national anthem allen good point let's go to jeff in pennsylvania online to jeff welcome to the program good morning the your previous guest togan failed to mention that there is an active appeal for the three district in case in the us court appeals for the pennsylvania we district thing case eighteen that's eighteen sixty the mar the schedule is now july second all appeals have to be in and right now they're trying to unbuckle review going on of a injunction pending appeal that would actually reverse the entire election that happened in pennsylvania because it was either legal for the supreme court to come up with a remedy that amended the constitution and age constitution and pennsylvania is very slow it is deliberate it has to be done twice and required.

pennsylvania jeff us one hundred percent
"us court appeals" Discussed on WDRC

WDRC

02:45 min | 3 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on WDRC

"And and of all the things that you can do if you really are concerned about about about those issues i suppose the least productive thing you could possibly do is to kneel during the national anthem i if there's any gesture you could make that is one hundred percent guaranteed to be futile it would be kneeling during the national anthem and good point let's go to jeff in pennsylvania online to jeff welcome to the program good morning the your previous guest hogan i have to mention that there is an active appeal for the three taken case in the us court appeals for the pennsylvania we this thing case eighteen eighteen sixty the the schedule is now july second all appeals have to be in and right now they're trying to i'm bob review going on a injunction pending appeal that would actually reverse the entire election happened in pennsylvania because it was either legal for the supreme court to come up with a remedy that amended the constitution and and they the constitution and pennsylvania is very slow it is deliberate it has to be don twice and requires ninety days to advertise every time it stunk that's why it's being appealed so so jeff let let's frame this a little bit for our listeners you're talking about the recent court decision in pennsylvania and gone from memory here you see you correct me if i'm saying this wrong but i as i recall it throughout the redistricting plan that had been put into place by the republican legislature in pennsylvania and basically substandard in two thousand eleven yes in two thousand eleven had been oppressed for some several election cycles in it and it and it purported to replace that redistricting plan with the different one drawn up by the judges am i saying that right they used a contractor that the judges approved and they drew it on that is not in the constitution that is against the constitutional pennsylvania and this is the same kind of stuff that essentially they could modify anything in the state of pennsylvania by edict in and days with more judges and that's what's at stake here the constitution of pennsylvania well you know it's so interesting jeff because this is something conservatives have been talking about.

hogan pennsylvania republican legislature jeff us bob one hundred percent ninety days
"us court appeals" Discussed on KHNR 690AM

KHNR 690AM

02:14 min | 3 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on KHNR 690AM

"The solution to higher taxes for this proletariat bourgeoisie crack is pretty much what we're getting day in and day out in quoting from the republic it's now one is special forty six percent rate for milionaire lifted asked to get him no what it ought to be government slouch you're spending get out of our faces stopped trying to attack one citizen and turn one against the other mark levin weeknights at seven right before lars larson ton on a up six night fm ninety four point three attorney oh oh so five but gave a today of the broadcast we focused primarily on the fbi responding to our four area are free of information act request on the uranium one deal and the fbi investigation into the criminal activities by the russian company that bought this the state on company and their affiliates in the united states and what the fbi told members of the board in the us government board that approve this deal fbi responded to our foia request noting a specifically that this is a matter of widespread an exception exceptional media interest in which there exist possible questions about the government's integrity which affect public confidence you have provided enough information concerning the statutory requirements permitting expedition therefore your request is so this is in the iranian one matter we also talked about fogged new names being added to the white house list for potential supreme court vacancies these would be nominees are potentially for the supreme court we've talked about two of those already amy baird and brett cavanaugh both now brick have always been a judge on the us court of appeals the dc circuit and a judge barrett who just got a again i confirm to be a judge on the us court appeals for the seven circuit there are three that will talk about that have been angeles in this segment of the broadcast but i want to go to stand at first uh dan as our director government affairs there's this list that the white house attitue of potential supreme court nominees if they could see arises net as to.

milionaire attorney fbi united states barrett mark levin uranium one white house amy baird brett cavanaugh director forty six percent
"us court appeals" Discussed on WCBM 680 AM

WCBM 680 AM

01:37 min | 4 years ago

"us court appeals" Discussed on WCBM 680 AM

"All right i want to talk for some of the games that he bubbling to the top judge deal prior soars on the eleventh circuits he's call robey wade the worst obama nation in the history of constitutional lock but they're conservatives who say their worried about something else a twenty eleven decision seen as a landmark expansion of transgender right it's a slave describe it this way he supported an absolutely revolutionary opinion in twenty eleven holding that anti trans discrimination qualifies as sex discrimination and isn't dustin generally for or been under the people protection cause of us constitution prior did a right the decision but he didn't join and it in the fall suggesting he endorse its logic and conclusion you know that's an issue this supreme court is going to tackle very said even is going to touch on a big case later in twenty seventeen well first of all shannon as you know bill pryor is to us court appeals judges it's down alabama he's been on the bench a long time he is a very distinguish record of public service having served as the attorney general valid down the before serving on a federal bench for over a decade bill prior has a very deep then shift initial opinions and the trans that's by case you reference he is one of his opinions where he was bound by precedence of the us supreme court in particular price warehouse case that involves gender stereotype in kinds of discrimination and really that cases about applying supreme court precedent is face li is one can which is what a court of appeals judge often has to do their bound by with supreme court says they have to apply those precedents to resisting facts that come before than in particular cases so i think that explains judge pryor's ruling more than anything else i wanna make sure that we touch on judge thomas harding.

shannon alabama us judge pryor robey obama attorney thomas harding