35 Burst results for "Us Supreme Court"

Jennifer Medina Can't Live With Rep. Mayra Flores' Truthful Responses

Mark Levin

01:25 min | 7 hrs ago

Jennifer Medina Can't Live With Rep. Mayra Flores' Truthful Responses

"In an interview in her still barren office writes this so called reporter Jennifer Medina the day after her swearing in ceremony miss Flores was asked whether she considered mister Biden the legitimately elected president No notice they never asked Democrats if they considered Trump the legitimately elected president in 2016 Or bush in 2000 Now what about Stacey Abrams She's not pressed about the legitimately elected governor of Georgia Kemp He's the worst president of the United States She said when asked three more times whether mister Biden had been legitimately elected she repeated the same non answer Biden there was fraud There's no question That there was fraud There's been fraud in every presidential election But in many respects this was worse From a constitutional perspective as I said over and over and over again Because article two was violated Republican state legislatures were overruled and election laws were changed by elected supreme courts Other state judges Democrat governors Democrat attorneys general democratic secretaries of state and so forth

Mister Biden Jennifer Medina Stacey Abrams Flores Donald Trump Kemp Bush Georgia Biden United States
What the Reactions to Clarence Thomas Post-Roe Reveal About White Libs

Mark Levin

01:37 min | 7 hrs ago

What the Reactions to Clarence Thomas Post-Roe Reveal About White Libs

"What the reactions to clarence Thomas post roe reveal about white liberals I said wait a minute where did this come from Columbia University Sociology department Which is like the sociology department you know the university of Beijing or the university of Moscow And they say here soon after the court handed down its decision in row that is the Dobbs case Some pro choice advocates began hurling outrageous and overtly racist remarks of the justice By Musa our carbide and Paul F Lars fell There were 6 Supreme Court Justices who voted to overturn roe versus wade they said The majority opinion was authored by justice Sam Alito But in the aftermath of the ruling there has been an intense and particular focus on a different justice Clarence Thomas soon after the court handed down its decision some pro choice advocates began hurling outrageous and overtly racist remarks In Thomas's direction including liberal evocations of the N word on Twitter Often to the acclaim of some other left aligned whites

Clarence Thomas Post Roe Columbia University Sociology University Of Beijing University Of Moscow Paul F Lars Justice Sam Alito Dobbs Musa Wade Supreme Court Clarence Thomas Thomas Twitter
AOC Calls for Abortion Clinics on Federal Land

The Dan Bongino Show

00:42 sec | 14 hrs ago

AOC Calls for Abortion Clinics on Federal Land

"He had politicians like AOC and senator Elizabeth Warren calling for the federal government to just open abortion clinics on federal lands Listen to her Open abortion clinics on federal land Now so she's not alone right You've got senator Ed Markey calling for packing the Supreme Court He tweeted now is the time to add four more seats to the court restore balance and protect the right to an abortion It's actually not a right but you're talking about a human life But anyways these are the same people who also want to abolish the Electoral College

Senator Elizabeth Warren Senator Ed Markey AOC Federal Government Supreme Court Electoral College
Kim Kardashian: 'Fourth of July Has Been Cancelled'

The Dan Bongino Show

01:09 min | 14 hrs ago

Kim Kardashian: 'Fourth of July Has Been Cancelled'

"So Kim Kardashian right You also have someone like her she shared a post on her Instagram story That read this it said 4th of July has been canceled due to the shortage of independence sincerely women Obviously a response to the Supreme Court's ruling of overturning roe versus wade But I was thinking this about that shouldn't a woman who became a billionaire because of a sex tape be a little bit more grateful Like how many countries can you do that And also isn't that sort of an indictment on our society that someone like her could become a billionaire Because of a sex tape This says a lot about our country right there But what we're saying is this cultural reinforcement of hatred for America Not patriotism for America Hatred for America We saw it when the city of Orlando tweeted this out they said a lot of people probably don't want to celebrate our nation right now We can't blame them When there is so much division hate and unrest why on earth would you have a party celebrating it It went on to say yes America is in stray right now but you know what We already bought the fireworks So why the heck not more or less It's about the fireworks not about what a country stands for

Kim Kardashian America Wade Supreme Court Orlando
Wisconsin court: Sex trafficking can be defense for homicide

AP News Radio

00:40 sec | 14 hrs ago

Wisconsin court: Sex trafficking can be defense for homicide

"The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled sex trafficking can be a defense for homicide The justices ruled a 2008 state line Wisconsin but absolves trafficking victims of criminal liability for any offenses committed as a direct result of being trafficked extend to first degree intentional homicide Crystal Kaiser is charged with murder The court says she must first provide evidence for a trial judge that her decision to kill Randall valar in 2018 was connected to being trafficked Kaiser contains she met vollard on a sex trafficking website Kaiser's attorneys had planned to invoke Wisconsin's immunity law at her trial but a county judge refused to allow it I'm Ed

Wisconsin Supreme Court Crystal Kaiser Randall Valar Wisconsin Vollard Kaiser
When Egregious Injustice Occurs, You Can't Just 'Move On'

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

01:58 min | 14 hrs ago

When Egregious Injustice Occurs, You Can't Just 'Move On'

"In the last segment, I talked about how the Supreme Court might be taking the view that one can't do very much about the past election, but the court might take steps to tighten up the process, bring it more in line with the constitution for the 2024 election. But I think that we shouldn't take the view that 2020 is in the rearview mirror and that somehow this is something that we need to quote move on from. Yes, in the end, we do have to move on, but I think we don't want to move on without some reckoning of what happened in 2020. And I came to this view really not initially, but after I did all the work I did both to do the movie 2000 meals and the accompanying book, which by the way comes out at the end of August, you can pre order it now on Amazon, it's called well. You guessed it. 2000 meals, but there's a little tag that says the full story why because there's going to be more in the book than there was in the movie. Now, initially when I began work, went through the vote, Debbie and I did. I took the view that look, we want to make a movie that's going to tell the truth, about 2020, and we want to try to fix things in the future, but it never crossed my mind that we want to do anything about 2020 itself. And yet, the more I dug into it, the more I realized, well, if a grievous injustice has been done, then you can't simply quote move on. Think about I mentioned this example other times the Tour de France. If Lance Armstrong cheated 7 or 8 times to win, she did during the Olympics. Well, I mean, don't you take away the guy's medals? You just say, let's fix the Tour de France for the next round, so it doesn't happen again, let line scores have his glory. No, we want to deprive him of the fruit of the cheating.

Supreme Court Amazon Debbie Tour De France Lance Armstrong Olympics
Could the Supreme Court Radically Reshape Elections?

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

02:26 min | 14 hrs ago

Could the Supreme Court Radically Reshape Elections?

"People sometimes ask me, what is the impact? Of a documentary like 2000 meals going to be. What can you reasonably expect from a film that is, after all, a film? Well, as it turns out, with something like this, particularly when a film breaks out when it begins to be seen by a lot of people, when it begins to become an understood term in and of itself. You don't have to explain what 2000 meals is. You just invoke it and people kind of know what you're referring to. Is it has a reach, kind of like dropping a stone into a pond, the ripple is actually flow pretty far out. And sometimes in ways difficult to anticipate. So here we go, the Supreme Court, just announced on Thursday. This was before signing out and taking off. The Supreme Court said, we're going to take a case in the next session. Now this is a session that we'll have a little bit of a different court, right? Breyer will be off. Jackson will be on. And but this is a case involving elections. And the case of the Supreme Court is going to decide is who makes the rules governing elections. Now, let's turn to the constitution. The constitution says that the time and the place and the manner of election shall be quote prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof. And the constitution says, almost exactly the same thing with regard to presidential electors. So the constitution is in a sense very clear. There's only one group that decides elections and that is in each of the individual 50 states. It's the legislature of those states. So you might think, well, isn't that the way it is now? And the answer is no. We have a kind of complex process in many states. In which a mixture of legislators, yes, but election administrators state judges are calling the shots and this was particularly true in the 2020 election. You had all kinds of people making decisions about voter ID laws, about absentee ballots, about drop boxes, about signature matching, about deadlines for receiving absentee and mail in ballots, for where drop boxes should go. In many cases, these issues would decided without lawmakers having any say at

Supreme Court Breyer Legislature Jackson
The Supreme Court's EPA Ruling Was the Beginning of Something Bigger

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

01:11 min | 15 hrs ago

The Supreme Court's EPA Ruling Was the Beginning of Something Bigger

"In the Supreme Court's recent EPA decision, this was a West Virginia versus EPA, the issue front and center was the ability of the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency to use the broad rubric of the clean air act. Cleaning up the air. To somehow wipe out the coal industry impose prohibitive regulations that would cause essentially called companies to go completely out of business. And proceed from there on the basis that this was a crusade that the EPA would lead to take on climate change. And the Supreme Court basically said, no, that's not something the EPA has any congressional authority to do. The actual clean air act was passed on the Nixon 1971, I believe. No one was even talking about climate change. That wasn't the delegation of authority. And so if Congress wants to make new laws that deal with climate change, that's a separate issue. They can. But the EPA can't just take it upon itself to launch this kind of a

EPA Supreme Court West Virginia Nixon Congress
What Ever Happened to the Abortion Leaker?

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

00:59 min | 1 d ago

What Ever Happened to the Abortion Leaker?

"After issuing a series of landmark rulings on a whole bunch of issues from guns to abortion, religious freedom, the Supreme Court is now in recess until October. And so they have decamped. I won't say they're all out of town, but they're, in a sense, not working. And it got me thinking, what about that abortion leak? What happened to the leaker? How come we don't know the identity of the leaker? Well, as it turns out, it doesn't look like we may ever know. And this is really strange. I mean, first of all, is it that hard to find the leaker? Were they able to find the leaker, but are now concealing the identity of the leaker for some reason? And then in some ways, the intriguing question that the leak come from the left or from the right.

Supreme Court
An Update on What's Happening in the Wake of Roe v. Wade

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

01:13 min | 1 d ago

An Update on What's Happening in the Wake of Roe v. Wade

"What's happening in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to overrule roe versus wade? Well, the first thing to notice is that no cataclysm has occurred. And for people who warned that this decision would produce a kind of social catastrophe that people would be going nuts, our social fabric itself would be rendered. And to be honest, I myself expected a more stormy reaction when the group called James revenge said, you know, that's going to be a night of rage. I thought, well, that could be, you know, a week of rage. Two weeks of rage, as it turns out there was nothing. Well, I mean, they were a few protests. And there are some protests, even now the left is trying to intimidate these justices. Let's go protest right outside their homes. By the way, I'm happy to say Congress has passed a law Biden signed it to increase security for the Supreme Court Justices and so there are some obviously First Amendment rights about being able to protest, but it's a different matter when you are protesting in a manner that intimidates these justices at their residences itself.

James Revenge Supreme Court Wade Biden Congress
Dinesh Reflects on a July 4 'Anti-Party' Organized by the Left

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

02:16 min | 1 d ago

Dinesh Reflects on a July 4 'Anti-Party' Organized by the Left

"The philosopher Edmund Burke once said the love of our country our country should be lovely. Now, I think what work is getting at is he was making the point that while we love our country in part because it is ours. I mean, we love our country sort of for the same reason we love our kids. They are ours. But at the same time, our kids can be sometimes unlovable. And the same can be true of one's country. And I was thinking about all this in the wake of the July 4th holiday. The Democrats were promoting an event in Arizona, which was literally called F the fourth F the fourth. And the event was evidently put on by some women's group that Tucson women's march, but it was being promoted by the pima county Democratic Party. And then when Republicans got a hold of it and said, basically, look how anti American these people are. They won't even celebrate a national holiday. In fact, they want to they're using all these obscenities and connection with it. The pima county people deleted the tweet, but they said, listen, we're deleting the tweet because we think that being the name of the event is in poor taste. From the meme is in poor taste, but we support the event. And interestingly, in the event, the women's March people said, in effect, bring your shoes, water, lawn chairs, posters, and your anger and your anger. So this appears to be in part over the Supreme Court overturning the road decision. And in a strange way, it's also a grudging acknowledgment that the Supreme Court in doing this was affirming the principles of the founding because why else would you say F before you say after fourth because you think the founding principles themselves are bad? After all, if you thought that the court was usurping, it's authority. And if you thought that the court was misreading the constitution and misreading the Declaration of Independence and then you would, you would affirm the fourth. And accused the Supreme Court of betraying the true principles of the founding, but no, I think the left realizes they don't like those

Pima County Democratic Party Edmund Burke Pima County Tucson Arizona Supreme Court Supreme Court Of Betraying
What Decade Is America Living In?

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

00:36 sec | 1 d ago

What Decade Is America Living In?

"We keep talking about what year we're back in. The Texas Supreme Court late Friday night allowed a 1925 law banning abortion to take effect overturning a lower court ruling that a temporarily blocked it in Texas. That meant a 1925 law written before roe, which had banned abortions and punished those who performed them with possible imprisonment, automatically came into effect. We keep saying, you know, we're in 1950. No, welcome to 1925. If you live in Texas, not Wisconsin. For 20s. Wisconsin is trying to enact a law that was passed in the 1800s. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, why these things were still on the books. I have no

Texas Supreme Court ROE Texas Wisconsin
July 4 parade shooting leaves 6 dead, 30 hurt; man detained

AP News Radio

00:51 sec | 1 d ago

July 4 parade shooting leaves 6 dead, 30 hurt; man detained

"After another mass shooting President Biden says the nation is yet again being tested Both on the streets and in courts The president yesterday noted the latest shooting came days after contentious Supreme Court rulings on abortion and guns There's been reason to think that this country is moving backward But at a July 4th cookout he said the nation marked its birthday as it always does By looking ahead We're going to get through all of this For now I'm waiting for something bad to happen all of a sudden Philadelphia mayor Jim Kenney after two police officers were grazed in a holiday shooting on Chicago's LD Illinois governor JB pritzker mourned those killed in highland park by what he calls the uniquely American plague of gun violence This madness must stop Sagar Meghani Washington

President Biden Jim Kenney Supreme Court Jb Pritzker Philadelphia Highland Park Illinois Chicago Sagar Meghani Washington
MSNBC Promotes Civil War Over Recent SCOTUS Rulings

The Dan Bongino Show

01:59 min | 2 d ago

MSNBC Promotes Civil War Over Recent SCOTUS Rulings

"Here is some bizarre audio This is out of MSNBC This is a historian Michael Beck loth Talking about this is the kind of stuff I'm telling you This is where the air If you were a Republican say oh my Fox show talking about or even hinting at a coming like Civil War that because Republicans are going to lose their minds and start attacking people They'd be like what are you doing You would be on the crazy media matters lunatics would be like screaming and peeing themselves Here's a guy in MSNBC saying as Supreme Court man you know Civil War it's a possibility Yeah check this out This country further in the direction of some kind of new Civil War I mean that's obviously something pretty alarming They're tell us what you mean by that while you think that I'm not saying that lightly Savannah I think you know why don't usually overstate things Here's a case where the Supreme Court is doing a decision that is going to fly in the face of at least what polls tell us is a majority of Americans maybe 60 to 70% And if you look at human history and American history that tends to push a society and the Civil War or at least towards Civil War if it's something that's as basic as this Now I get it because again I'm not a crazy leftist who's going to mischaracterize a man's words He says historian and he's going to say well I'm just looking at the data points throughout history and when polling is really bad on an issue like this You know you get societal strife and Civil War Okay you know what Fair enough But again this is the kind of thing whereas I'm a fair host I am I'm a conservative I'm an opinion guy I have conservative opinions But I do believe in fairness I promise you if Donald Trump would have mentioned that word Right now he would get no such deference None As a matter of fact when Donald Trump says something like go march peacefully and patriotically He accused of inciting a violent insurrection

Michael Beck Supreme Court Msnbc FOX Savannah Donald Trump
In light of EPA court ruling, new focus on states' power

AP News Radio

00:47 sec | 2 d ago

In light of EPA court ruling, new focus on states' power

"The Supreme Court may have limited the power of the federal government to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from existing power plants but its ruling did not touch the power of the states While democratic states have taken the lead on the most aggressive climate policy in recent years some Republican led states are also helping shift the U.S. power grid toward cleaner sources of energy a group of 24 states has formed the U.S. climate alliance most of those commonwealths are led by Democrats but a few including Vermont Massachusetts and Maryland have Republican governors together the state's account for 42% of the nation's greenhouse gas emissions and 18 of those states have set 100% clean energy goals I'm Shelly Adler

U.S. Climate Alliance Supreme Court Federal Government U.S. Vermont Massachusetts Maryland Shelly Adler
Howard Stern Is All Doom and Gloom About MCU Debut

AJ Benza: Fame is a Bitch

01:56 min | 2 d ago

Howard Stern Is All Doom and Gloom About MCU Debut

"Busy. Howard Stern is, well, look, he's let it slip recently that he could be joining the Marvel Cinematic Universe in a doctor doom movie. I don't care about these movies. I don't watch marvel stuff. So I don't really know who doctor doom is in the context of the comics. But during the commercials on his show the other day, how it left his microphone on so they say, while he talked to his producer, Gary Della bate, about possible guests to book for the show. And it's kind of difficulty here because the ads are playing over the conversation. But Howard tells Gary Della boate that he won't be able to talk much in the next few months and then his co host Robin Quivers wants to inquire about, well, what's going on with you over the summer? Why can't you talk much? And he says, well, I'm going to do doctor doom. Then he said, but believe me, I'm F and miserable about it. How is miss Mitchell about anything? And then he continued to share that he reached out to the marvel comic universe people. He reached out to the marvel vet, Iron Man himself, Robert Downey, junior for acting tips. And he asked Gary if he could get the number to the director, John favreau and get his contact information. Now maybe hours less than enthused about the mystery project because he's more focused on what he also said he's going to do. And that is to run for president in 2024. Because after the Supreme Court overturned roe V wade, Howard said on Monday last week that he wants to run for president to overturn all this bullshit. I know Howard. I've been in that studio over a hundred times when the show is off and running commercials. That's when Howard is really Howard. The guy you hear on the radio during the show and the old days, especially, really wasn't Howard. That was a character.

Gary Della Bate Gary Della Boate Robin Quivers Howard Stern Howard John Favreau Robert Downey Roe V Wade Mitchell Gary Supreme Court
Post-Roe, Women Discover How Their Employer Influences Abortion Access

AP News Radio

00:51 sec | 4 d ago

Post-Roe, Women Discover How Their Employer Influences Abortion Access

"Abortion providers and patients across the country have been struggling to navigate the evolving legal landscape around abortion laws and access I'm Ben Thomas with the latest Texas clinics have been turning away patients rescheduling them and now face canceling appointments again after the Texas Supreme Court blocked a lower court order late Friday that had given some confidence to resume abortions The state had left an abortion ban on the books for the past 50 years walrus was in place but a Houston judge on Tuesday reassured some clinics they could temporarily resume abortions up to 6 weeks into pregnancy Texas attorney general Ken Paxton quickly asked the state Supreme Court stocked with 9 Republican justices to temporarily put that order on hold which it did Friday night In Florida a law banning abortions after 15 weeks went into effect Friday

Ben Thomas Texas Supreme Court Texas Ken Paxton Houston Supreme Court Florida
Sean Davis: If a Baby Is Not Human, What Species Is It?

America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast

01:26 min | 4 d ago

Sean Davis: If a Baby Is Not Human, What Species Is It?

"We're not psychiatrists shown, but I have to ask you to react to what we've seen over the weekend again and again and again. Not only was there pregnant woman outside the Supreme Court with a massive belly which had written on her belly, not a human yet. I mean, just mind numbing indoctrination. There are so many reports as even video Shaun of pro abortion protesters there with their little children wearing political t-shirts and what have you. What does that tell us about the place that this party has sunken to? Well, first off, I hope the baby inside that woman is not human. Exactly what species was she fornicating with. Good question. Good question. It's always amused me. If the baby is not human, what species is she, and if she's not alive, why do you need to kill it? Right. We all know that's absurd, even that person knows that absurd. What they're actually saying is that I don't believe that this person inside me is entitled to the same rights. I have because if that were the case, it would be inconvenient for me. And when you take that into account, it makes clear that while we think this is a political battle, it's actually not. It's a spiritual battle. There's clearly an otherworldly element here. And what I saw over the weekend in the reactions from the left was just was purely demonic.

Supreme Court
"us supreme court" Discussed on THE NEWS with Anthony Davis

THE NEWS with Anthony Davis

05:27 min | Last month

"us supreme court" Discussed on THE NEWS with Anthony Davis

"U.S. Supreme Court halts lifeline for those wrongfully convicted. Russian soldier gets life sentence in first war crimes trial. And Biden in indo Pacific talks with India, Japan and Australia. It's Tuesday, May 24. I'm Anthony Davis. The Supreme Court on Monday gutted constitutional protections that for years have provided a federal lifeline to innocent prisoners facing prolonged incarceration, or even execution following wrongful convictions, stemming from poor legal counsel given to them by the state. In a 6 to three ruling, the newly dominant right-wing majority of the nation's highest court barred federal courts from hearing new evidence that was not previously presented in a state court as a result of the defendants ineffective legal representation. The decision means that prisoners will no longer have recourse to federal judges, even when they claim they were wrongfully convicted because their lawyers failed to conduct their cases properly. The decision eviscerated the Supreme Court's own precedent in a move that the three liberal justices called illogical and perverse. In a dissenting opinion, justice Sonia Sotomayor slammed the decision, warning it would leave many people to face incarceration or even execution without any meaningful chance to vindicate their right to counsel. The ruling in shin versus Ramirez was written by clarence Thomas, the increasingly right-wing justice, who has come to the fore as a result of the court sharp shift to the right, following Donald Trump's three appointments. He was supported by all 5 other conservative justices, including the chief justice John Roberts. In his opinion, Thomas presented the case as one of the state's rights. He said that federal courts should not be allowed to override the state's core power to enforce criminal law. A captured Russian soldier who pleaded guilty to killing a civilian was sentenced by a Ukrainian court on Monday to life in prison, the maximum, amid signs the Kremlin may in turn put on trials of some of the fighters who surrendered at Mary pole steelworks. Meanwhile, in a rare public expression of opposition to the war from the ranks of the Russian elite, a veteran Kremlin diplomat resigned and sent a scathing letter to foreign colleagues in which he said of the invasion, never have I been so ashamed of my country as on February 24. Also, Ukrainian president Vladimir zelensky called for maximum sanctions against Russia in a video address to world leaders and executives at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. He also revealed one of the deadliest single strikes of the war, a missile attack on a village near Kyiv that killed almost 90 people. And on the battlefield heavy fighting raged in the Donbass in the east, where Moscow's forces have stepped up their bombardment. Cities not under Russian control were constantly shelled, and one Ukrainian official said Russian forces targeted civilians trying to flee. Nearly 50 defense leaders from around the world met on Monday and agreed to send more advanced weapons to Ukraine, including a harpoon launcher and missiles to protect its coast, defense secretary Lloyd Austin told reporters. And general Mark milley chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said that low level discussion is underway on how the U.S. may need to adjust its training of Ukrainian forces and on whether some U.S. troops should be based in Ukraine. Meanwhile, the U.S. embassy in Kyiv has partially reopened and is staffing up again and there have been questions about whether the U.S. will send a marine security force back in to help protect the embassy or if other options should be considered. President Joe Biden is winding up his visit to Asia today by holding talks with the Quartet of indo Pacific leaders that includes Australia's new prime minister and India's Narendra Modi with whom differences persist over how to respond to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Biden will meet separately with newly sworn in Anthony albanese of Australia and with Modi after a four way gathering of the security group known as the quad. The partnership which includes the U.S., Australia, India, and Japan has become increasingly relevant as Biden has moved to adjust U.S. foreign policy to put greater focus on the region and to counter China's rise as an economic and security power, looming over the quad leaders talks will be Biden's blunt statement on Monday that the U.S. would intervene militarily if China were to invade Taiwan, saying the burden to protect Taiwan is even stronger after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The White House insists that Biden's unusually forceful comments about Taiwan did not amount to a shift in U.S. policy toward the self ruled island that China claims as its own..

Supreme Court indo Pacific Biden Ukrainian court Anthony Davis Mary pole steelworks Vladimir zelensky Sonia Sotomayor Australia clarence Thomas Kyiv India John Roberts Japan Donald Trump Ukraine Ramirez Lloyd Austin Mark milley U.S.
"us supreme court" Discussed on Native America Calling

Native America Calling

05:23 min | 4 months ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on Native America Calling

"Efforts to adopt these two children. And Sarah hill, what do you think it says to the Supreme Court that Cherokee nation is supporting the defense of ICWA? I mean, the Cherokee nation has definitely been here before. Defending both Indian children, the parents of Indian children and the act. This is something that the nation has put a significant amount of time and energy into making sure that, I mean, it is a an existential issue. It will always is for tribes. We don't we will not continue to exist if we are not able to protect our children and keep them in our tribes. So I mean, this is something that to us seems like it has something that must be defended. It isn't an option for us to stand back and say, well, we'll let these equal issues. This is a really very important case for Indian country and for the Cherokee nation. Okay. Let's go back to Sarah Castelli and Sarah. I'm curious, who are these forces actively working against ICWA? I know fingers have been pointed at some private adoption agencies. Yeah, I mean, there are a number of folks here. We see a confluence of political agendas we would say. So, you know, the state of Texas who brought the suit the handful of non native foster parents involved Goldwater institute, a conservative think tank in Arizona has also been involved in more than a dozen cases related to aqueous state and federal cases either as a party or filing amicus briefs. So there really are a number of players coming together here in the well orchestrated well funded attack on ICWA and as Sarah hill was saying, ick was the face of this movement right now, this anti sovereignty movement, but we know that there are really other motives here. So we see motives to overturn tribal rights for profit to access tribal lands, natural resources, really ultimately to dismantle the future existence of tribal nations by removing protections for their youngest generations now. So there really is a much larger picture here and ICWA is the face of it now, but we know that that's just this moment in time that there's really a much more substantial agenda here. Okay. And Sarah, you know, ICWA going back almost 45 years now and this goal of giving priority and adoptions of Native American children to native families. And I read statistics that even when they go in place, native children are still disproportionately taken from families. According to data. So why is that? Why is ICWA just not working as well as it should be? Yeah, you know, you point to the statistics here, Sean, and that's an important thing to take a look at. We know that native families are four times more likely to have their children removed and placed in foster care than their white counterparts. And so this really is a very critical issue at this moment in time. This is affecting thousands of native children and their families. And we know there is bias in the system. There is evidence to support that. And we know that in many places, states and tribes are still trying to work together to better implement the federal law and it really is staggering that although the law has been around for almost 45 years that there are still plenty of states child welfare workers, judges who are still learning about ICWA for the first time. So because in many places, there aren't a substantial number of cases involving native children child welfare workers may not be familiar with the requirements of the law, you know, I've had a judge called Nick before and put us on speakerphone and open court and asked the question, what is this ICWA anyway and what does it mean we have to do so unfortunately, although it's been around for a long time, there's still a whole lot of education that we need to do about proper implementation of the law. So I think those are a few things at play here. We're talking native legal issues today in the child welfare act, gaming, jurisdiction of tribal courts. There's another pressing argument facing the current session of the Supreme Court. As always, we welcome questions and comments from all points of view on native America calling. So what are you waiting for? Give us a holler. The number one 809 9 6.

ICWA Sarah hill Sarah Castelli Goldwater institute Sarah Supreme Court Arizona Texas Sean Nick America
"us supreme court" Discussed on Rage for Justice Report

Rage for Justice Report

01:56 min | 8 months ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on Rage for Justice Report

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

HIV CVS Jerry iTunes store
"us supreme court" Discussed on Rage for Justice Report

Rage for Justice Report

05:32 min | 8 months ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on Rage for Justice Report

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

U.S. Supreme Court Jamie court Jerry flanagan Aetna Jerry CBS CVS federal government United States Pearl Harbor HIV D.C.
"us supreme court" Discussed on Consumer Finance Monitor

Consumer Finance Monitor

02:51 min | 1 year ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on Consumer Finance Monitor

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

ramirez trans union Ramirez fackler Supreme court cra supreme court opec Chris
"us supreme court" Discussed on True Mysteries of the Pacific Northwest

True Mysteries of the Pacific Northwest

04:10 min | 1 year ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on True Mysteries of the Pacific Northwest

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

US Supreme Court Supreme Court Senate Samuel Chase House of Representatives Abe Fortas official US US Constitution John Marshall president
"us supreme court" Discussed on WTOP

WTOP

03:22 min | 2 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on WTOP

"On it. The US Supreme Court today said President Trump does not have absolute power when it comes to grand jury subpoenas. The case dealt with an attempt by New York prosecutors to get Mr Trump's financial records law professor Laurie Levenson, the Supreme Court held that no one is above the law, including the president. And therefore he is not immune from having the New York grand jury issue a subpoena to his personal accounting firm for his tax returns. I'm Stephen Portnoy, the president defiantly responds to the ruling in the New York case, blasting what he calls a political prosecution. He vows to keep fighting in a quote politically corrupt New York Both of the president's appointees to the court, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh sided with local New York prosecutors and against Mr Trump. Despite the ruling, it's possible some legal experts say, likely that New York officials will not get the records before the election. CBS NEWS update I'm Steve Futterman. Let's get congressional reaction to the Supreme Court decision along with legislation Rhea it related to the pandemic, GOP's Mitchell Miller today on the Hill. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the high court's decision shows the president is not above the law, and it's important to upholding the system of checks and balances if, in fact They would have ruled that he could do whatever he wants, without any oversight from Congress. That would have been just devastating to tell you the honest truth, and Pelosi says the house will continue its oversight of the president. We have a path that the Supreme Court has laid out that we certainly will not ignore. As for the pandemic, she says. Democrats will press for renewal of unemployment insurance. And a trillion dollars for state and local governments on Capitol Hill, Mitchell Miller W T O P News 6 33 and breaking news this evening. There's been an arrest in the July 4th killing of an 11 year old boy in D. C. Let's go live for more details and double the GOP's Mike Murillo. Yeah. Sean Police have announced the arrest in the murder of 11 year old Davon McNeil, who was gunned down on the fourth of July in Southeast D. C 18 year old Darryl Bond has been charged with murder. D. C. Mayor Muriel Bowser says the arrest Send a strong message. We will not tolerate this violence. Avon should be with his family today. Police chief Peter New Ship on new shaman what investigators believe happened Moments before the shooting, Davon had headed towards his family home to retrieve an item for a family member. As Davon made his way down his walkway towards his doorway. Five armed suspects appeared in the immediate vicinity and gunfire erupted this happening on Independence Day. The evening of the police are also looking for three other men warrants around for their arrest. They are 22 year old Christian Wingfield, 25 year old Marcel Gordon in 19 year old Carlo general. Also, they're looking to get another warrant against another person. Wingfield says that our Wingfield police say was under house arrest at the time of the murder and police chief Internation believes he cut off his ankle bracelet before the crime happened. McNeil was not believed to have been the intended target by the shooters. But again they're looking for three people right now. One arrest made today. Anybody with information. This case should call DC Police Reporting live. Mike Murillo. W T o p new Thank you. Monique. Up ahead on w t O P. Why? Michael Cohen is back in prison. 6 30 for the following testimonials from a real green broke TMS patient green.

US Supreme Court New York president President Trump Davon McNeil Mitchell Miller House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Christian Wingfield Sean Police Mike Murillo murder GOP Stephen Portnoy Laurie Levenson D. C. Mayor Muriel Bowser DC Police CBS Peter New
"us supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

PRI's The World

01:57 min | 2 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

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

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

PRI's The World

02:07 min | 2 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

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

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

PRI's The World

07:07 min | 2 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

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

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

PRI's The World

03:14 min | 2 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on PRI's The World

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

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

Radio Free Flint

06:44 min | 2 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on Radio Free Flint

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

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

Radio Free Flint

06:44 min | 2 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on Radio Free Flint

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

United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Moran Flint Justice Scalia Moses basketball Washington Maran prosecutor Justice William Rehnquist University of dixieland subdiv flint courthouse Detroit Bell Rang Coney Island Gore Michigan Vincent
"us supreme court" Discussed on News 96.5 WDBO

News 96.5 WDBO

02:28 min | 2 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on News 96.5 WDBO

"Computer the US Supreme Court gets back to work today was a major cases on the docket one case justices will see is a challenge of Louisiana's law which requires doctors to perform a boy who perform of work portions to have admitting privileges at local hospitals some hospitals require doctors to do a certain number of admissions in a particular year to keep privileges and the thing about early abortion is it's a very safe procedure so if you don't do a lot of admissions to the hospital the very safety of the procedure makes it difficult to actually get those privileges and then there are hospitals that are hostile to abortion and don't wish to extend those privileges to abortion providers so the challenger say if the law is permitted to go into effect there will be one doctor who can perform abortions remaining in the state of Louisiana reporter Kinshasa's Louisiana's abortion laws some weird rules in Texas the court struck down a twenty sixteen Francis formally opened a meeting of bishops that is discussing the one thousand year old requirement for celibacy for priests the debate pits those who say or Dana buried men could relieve the church's clergy shortage against those who warned that doing so would undermine the distinctive character of the priesthood the new path will be discussed over the next three weeks a success with nine more to go the first attend space walks to swap out batteries of the ISS the first space walk to change batteries took seven hours in one minute but it's not like astronauts Christina cook and Andrew Morgan were in an information bubble thank you and good news eagles are ahead fourteen zero in the second quarter appreciated telling Nestor Cruz in a wonderful day also wanted a face the card delay since Quorn flight controllers about a jagged edge caused by a tiny meteorite hit the could snag a space suit space station has hundreds of dings from space junk gypsy written ABC news search continues this morning for a suspect in a weekend bar shooting in Kansas city four people died inside a members only club five other shot outside please leave the shooting is a result of an earlier flight in the bar and another disappointing Sunday for Florida football fans will start with the jags were losers on the road falling thirty four to twenty seven of the Carolina Panthers the box didn't fare much better losing to their division rivals saints in New Orleans your final score there thirty one to twenty four as for the dolphins they lose the bye week and only one of my fantasy football teams one in college the Florida Gators move up three spots to number seven in the latest AP rankings meanwhile UCF is back out of the top twenty five year old movie news ninety six point five W. D. BO five forty one on our land does.

Nestor Cruz football Florida ABC W. D. BO Florida Gators New Orleans Carolina Panthers jags Kansas city US Supreme Court Andrew Morgan Christina cook ISS Dana Francis Texas reporter Louisiana one thousand year
"us supreme court" Discussed on KTRH

KTRH

04:58 min | 3 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on KTRH

"With us the US Supreme Court will start its next term hafter summer punctuated by mass shootings that left more than two dozen dead heightening the impact of pending cases that focus on when civilians can carry weapons in public the most immediate matter involves a New York City ordinance the place severe limitations on transporting hand guns that are locked and on loaded the High Court agreed in January to take up the dispute the measure permits a handgun owner with the so called premises license to take the firearm to one of seven shooting ranges located within the city but for bids carrying it beyond the five boroughs even to second homes or ranges the city has since walked back the restrictions more from Melissa Quinn Supreme Court reporter at the Washington examiner Melissa what else could be considered one when the patient on who can hear carry a handgun outside of the home I think he thought that New Jersey diligent on the books but if you wanna opinion apartment to Kerry in public you have to show that you have a justifiable need to do so and then in the other case involves gunmaker running ten which last week to hear the dispute that was filed against it by the victims of the shooting back in twenty twelve basically the families wonderful thing ten liable because god made Adam when used to Bushmaster rifle in the twenty twelve attacked and Weddington said that there is a federal law on the books that should any sort of liability so we've got one that we're watching very closely that they keep you work at Supreme Court whether or not they will pick up in here right so in New Jersey if there are you have to show this justifiable reason to carry a weapon outside the home who gets to determine whether or not your reason is legit I really have to move quickly to local law enforcement he came about is there the contractors are the one who filed a lot yeah yeah high crime areas that would offer him a lot of protection when he does that and with the assistance of the group of course not reading requirement is a violation of the second amendment here is what among the lower courts in terms of rulings on these relations that are in place we're in we're we do see a circuit what so is among the federal appeals court that's really an area where the Supreme Court typically does play an really attractive to a possible Supreme Court review speak with Melissa Quinn at the Washington examiner Supreme Court reporter she's written a piece entitled firearms cases loom before Supreme Court after deadly summer you wrote to the telling your piece and this is what a lot of people are on edge about if the Supreme Court decides to take up these challenges the cases would come before a High Court with the five four conservative majority what is that mean in terms of maybe which cases actually get selected what the Supreme Court is going to kill it at any point I think though because you didn't see the chapter agreed to take up the creep out of New York that could signal perhaps a chef the willingness of the court to hear second well obviously that with the court that brought that agreed to hear the case with doctors right now he would have been involved in a conference where they went ahead and discussed whether or not to your argument I think for gun rights supporters that was obviously a very positive on signal perhaps he won't the justices shying away now just as cap course each other on the bench unlike what we have seen in the previous year I think this is definitely an issue where the president is going to get a lot of positive feedback for only another conservative thank you because the perception there it for the majority you will see the court perhaps being more open and friendly to you gun right overall which is not something which would be eight from what we had in the past yeah in in the wake of these recent shootings that we've had in say the el Paso in Dayton could the Supreme Court actually say you know what the subject is too sensitive right now there's legislation floating around what will put this on the back burner the court decided to agree to dismiss your work we would actually know what the reasoning is thanks Melissa Melissa Quinn Supreme Court reporter at the Washington examiner.

US Supreme Court
"us supreme court" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

03:10 min | 3 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

"The US Supreme Court ruled that the trump administration can divert military funds to pay for the construction of a border war also the Irish government gives a negative response to the new British prime minister's attempts to renegotiate the brexit backstop agreement he seems to have made a deliberate decision to set written on a collision course with the European Union on with our lives in relation to the president CH I think only he can answer the question as to why he's doing this and with this throughout the program DJ Zhang Chinese author and journalist and Sebastian Volga German journalist and correspondent in London for the Tigers Spiegel that's here on weekend coming to you today from Beijing this is the latest BBC news with rose Marie creek the US Supreme Court has agreed that the trump administration can use Pentagon funds to build sections of the president's promised portable with Mexico leading Democrats denounce the ruling from Washington Chris buckler the long border between the United States and Mexico has been at the center of a long battle between president trump on his political opponents in Congress Democrats have consistently blocked his attempts to secure funding to build more and bigger barriers between the countries he's repeatedly argued that the surge of migrants making their way to the US has created a crisis at the border and he said that left him in a position where you should be able to redirect billions of dollars from defense department funds to pay for the wall unlike the Supreme Court has agreed overturning a decision from a lower court the United States in Guatemala have signed a two year agreement so migration that covers US bound migrants from home to rest in El Salvador pulsing three gotcha Mona migrants will be required to fast seek asylum in Guatemala before being eligible to apply to enter the US in exchange Guatemalan farm workers will get easier access to work in the US will smile as president Jimmy Morales said his country would benefit is on the bubble made in one apple C. simply here this will put us in a privileged position as a privileged partner for the United States and as a privileged partner for the United States I say this because the United States is all main part now pro democracy demonstrators have been gathering in Hong Kong from March to the scene of a sort some protesters last Sunday by suspected underworld gangs the protesters were angered by the slow police response to last week's assaults Stephen McDonell reports whole whole police have denied permission for today's rally chief secretary Matthew troll number two in the whole Colin government has apologized for the slow police response when groups of men carrying homemade weapons assaulted protesters at a train station if demonstrators of accused some officers of colluding with triad gangs the calling for an official inquire a riot police and the black clad activists already gathering here in your long with fears of more street violence today.

US Supreme Court two year
"us supreme court" Discussed on The Cracked Podcast

The Cracked Podcast

08:08 min | 3 years ago

"us supreme court" Discussed on The Cracked Podcast

"Do you live in Chicago? Do you live in the twin cities of Minnesota you live anywhere near those? Or do you just love to travel while I love to travel because we're taking the cracked podcast to those cities are first ever live tour is this spring, Chicago Lincoln hall, April eleventh and Saint Paul Minnesota at the Amsterdam and hall, April. Twelfth I am so excited to do those shows on the road. We're getting local guests exciting guests and more together, and you can get tickets right now, they are selling, but there's still some and the links to get them. Our in our food newts for both Chicago, April eleventh and Saint Paul April twelfth, I really hope you'll join us for our spring tour, first tour and more. Maybe you'll see me and like my fun road outfit's. Right. Those are total mystery how how do I dress that like Bendel sift kind of Hobo or do? I wear sports gear. The local town. I don't know why I'm wondering about this out loud. Anyway, come see us. Thank you add on with the show. Hey there, folks. Welcome to another episode of the cracks podcast podcast all about why being alive is more interesting than people think it is. My name is Alex Schmidt. And I'm the head of podcasting here at cracks. I'm also known as many the clam also known as Schmidt e the champ. And I am also also a fan of history. You may know that if you see me on YouTube or jeopardy or something else where I am either wearing hats are talking about it. But as we put this podcast episode together. And by the way, it is about the US supreme court as we put it together. My mind kept going to medieval European kings and queens absolute ruler individual right to to run a whole country. And whenever you read histories of people like that, you see the big design advantage in that kind of monarchy because it's also the massive design flaw, which is that whenever a ruler has a problem their whole country kinda suddenly has that problem too. Right. If a king does not understand an intellectual concept, or if a king is bad with money, or if a king is like str-. Doubling with gout or or some other disease of the past. Usually suddenly the whole country struggles to then it doesn't understand that concept or spend money. Well, or I mean, the gout things more interact, but you know, what I mean? And that is no way to live. Right. You wanna live in a democracy where you can vote out a Turkey leg, waving bad king of person. I always think of him on a throne with a Turkey leg. And I love Turkey legs. Don't get me wrong. Great food, but that idea of a bad king like that. Oh, what a terrible situation. But here's a question. What if the United States across almost all of its history has tended to have a passive and nine person a quivalent of that figurative Turkey like waiver, sometimes great sometimes not so great. But either way invested with that kind of power over the country. And if that is true, isn't it weird that nobody talks about it? Well, here's our topic this week. Why a terrible US supreme court is the historical norm. One more time. That is why a terrible US supreme court. Is the historical norm. And my guest today is why I have really any sense of that at all, Ian Millhauser is the Justice editor at think progress, he's also a lawyer legal analyst, and he's the author of the book injustices, the supreme court's history of comforting the comfortable and afflicting be afflicted one more time because as a great title injustices, the supreme court's history of comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted that subtitle says it all across his book, he gets into the ways that the supreme court has not been all that consistent. You'd almost want them to just go one way that that's at least predictable. But here's a key quote from ins book describing them, quote, the justices have routinely committed to complementary sins against the constitution. They've embraced extra constitutional limits on the government's ability to protect the most vulnerable Americans while simultaneously, refusing to enforce rights that are explicitly enshrined in the constitutions. Text. And quote, and I had really a great time digging into this with him because as we'll talk about the supreme court has a pretty low reputation right now, I think there is something exciting about knowing that it has often deserved a low reputation because then also you notice the times when it really really worked and really really helped people out in particular. The Earl Warren court will talk about Earl Warren was chief Justice of the court and from the late fifties. Too early seventies. They had a really great run including decisions like Brown v board and other decisions holding that up. You may have heard of Brown v board in history class that's one where they pushed for desegregation of America's schools, and they are desegregated today, isn't that nice? But I think in history class we tend to hear about those super positive decisions. And then maybe some of the pre-civil war cases that were particularly bad toward toward people of various races and other than that. We don't. Really hear about how the supreme court has impacted business and health and our personal liberties as people, and we're gonna get into all of that today. So you can see how it has worked over time and have more perspective on what's going on today. This episode will be very foot Newt's heavy because I think it's an easy episode understand. It's it's not like going to be difficult to hear anything is just that we want you to have a lot of links to a lot of these cases. There's also a few fascinating ones that we will not get too. And you'll see them in the footnotes as something that the supreme court really did like buck v. Bell steel yourself before you look at the case, buck, the bell just warning you. But those things really happened, and they're really fascinating to see because it gives you insight into how that part of the government works. You know, the top of one third of the government the supreme court pretty important. And I think it's worth talking about today. I also want to give you one heads up because I am thrilled that we got into this topic. The supreme court. The supreme court is very timely. It's news that is happening as you'll probably hear in the show there even some announcements in terms of which cases, the court will or will not take on that are a few hours away from only tape this. We did it as late in the week as possible to keep it as timely as possible. But there could be some breaking news. And so we will discuss what could happen with those couple of things. And then in the text of the footnotes of this episode. We'll let you know what did happen. If there is a news to announce report. And so on you, you deserve a podcast that is fully accurate about news. If it means to be about news. And so that's what we're going to try to do with this particular show about something. That's happening. All the time. You know, those justices may look slow, but they can move. They make moves and we're going to move with them as absolute best. We can I hope you don't mind me text version of some of that as we need it. Also, I should say that's going to be a very very small percentage of the episode related to those super timely things. So the vast majority of. That is history and his things that you don't even need to check the footnotes for in terms of what's going on enough set up from me. This is just a really really fascinating look at how a key part of our government has pretty much always worked. And it's amazing to me that with all these supreme court justices. They are people that you did not directly vote for unless you are a United States Senator 'cause they they confirm them do any senators listen to the show, I would love to know it, please. If you if you were fully in the US Senate, let's let's get to talk, and maybe bring young could be fun either way. Please sit back or ask your congressional aide. Mr. Senator if you voted to confirm that Cavanaugh fella. And if so why the why the heck you did that not great either way. Here's this Goethe's riffing episode of the cracked podcast with Ian Millhauser. I'll be back after we wrap up talk to you. Then. With

supreme court United States Chicago Ian Millhauser Minnesota Bendel gout Saint Paul Chicago Lincoln hall US Senate Alex Schmidt Earl Warren YouTube Saint Paul Minnesota Turkey Amsterdam Brown buck Mr. Senator Senator