I'm so glad to see Leah is upright, lucid and as sharp as ever. #HealingVibes

Glad to see Leah doing better!!

Martha-Ann Alito’s heart skips a beat whenever she encounters highway flag men on her trips to Wildwood. 🚩

5 star review submitted as a get well to Leah!

Question. I’m an Australian so I’m not sure how laws work there, but here we generally use common sense to make laws that help all. Considering how close the US came to an actual coup and how both your Congress and Supreme Court are doing everything in their power to help the person who attempted the coup, what guardrails are being implemented/strengthened as law so something like this never happens again? Fun fact, in Australia trump would not have been able to run for PM because of his prior bankruptcies. Hugs 🇦🇺

@Gildedmuse

6 күн бұрын

Bankruptcy is enough to bar someone from running? See, to me the problem with Trump isn't that he's a convicted felon or had to declare bankruptcy - people make mistakes, and I don't think that a person who might have served jail time for marijuana possession or who might have had to declare personal bankruptcy to help save their families should be barred from participating in and fixing the system, and just because Trump is now a felon it doesn't change that historically many people of color or low economic status HAVE been railroaded and often face overly harsh penalties and they shouldn't have their ability to participate in democracy taken away because of that - it's that he's a morally repulsive person who doesn't show any empathy for the plight of others and has proven to have no diplomacy skills, no interest in the American people, no ability to lead in a crisis, and has a history of bad economic, international AND social policy. That's all the policies! And that was true before he was convicted. However, to answer your question, because of the way the US government is structured and due to us only having the two parties and Republicans having control over part of Congress and the Supreme Court, there isn't a lot that can be done. Unfortunately, a lot of US politics is based on having people in power who respect tradition, the office, and the power that comes with it. When you remove that and have people in office who are only there for selfish reasons, those traditions that helped keep the government stable are no longer followed. The only way to make changes would be through the government, but half of the government has no interest in stopping a coup that they would benefit from (or they imagine they would, though the truth is when an tyrant takes over, no one is safe). Why would they strengthen guardrails that would stop there own team? The people that would do that have all been kicked out of the party, so there is no one left to help work with Democrats.

@thebubbleking5317

4 күн бұрын

The issue is that, in most cases, those guardrails would put in place by both the Supreme Court and Congress :/ so we're between a rock and a hard place at the moment!

The footnotes in the Munoz opinions were so salty Barret and Sotomayor must have been drinking Martha-ritas when writing them.

The band is back!

I love these guys. Great insight. Intelligent analysis. Prescient commentary. They nail it all.

Caught you on Don Lemon's show this afternoon. You got another One Melissa! Subscribed and ready.

Leah needs to stay out of those mosh pits! Too many broken elbows!

Is there no recourse outside of Congressional action? Like I know a partisan Congress isn't likely to call the justices before them to testify, but this is a broken system.

@jim0311

7 күн бұрын

13 circuit Courts only 9 justices.. Biden can increase the number of justices today..FDR almost did..it can change today if enough people call the WH and demand Biden act

Canadian here. Can someone explain how the supreme court actually comes to an official decision? Does the chief justice decide when a case is going to be decided or do all justices have to say "Yes, i'm ready to decide". For example, if the more left leaning justices were ready to make a decision is it up to them to persuade their colleagues to also decide? What are the logistics of how this works? When we say there hasn't been a decision, does it mean that they just haven't put together a formal decision or is it like a group project where some justices haven't turned in their work yet? Would love some clarity :)

@Gildedmuse

6 күн бұрын

Once a decision is written up, all you need is a majority of justices just need to sign on. Of course, it's possible for a decision to be held up if you can't get six justices on the same side. If it's being held up, it's because the majority want to hold it up.

@naomig8997

6 күн бұрын

@@Gildedmuse Thank you!

Beyonce Polka, Oom PahPah...all in. Thank you for all your hard work. Vote 💙💙

I suppose it would suck to give immunity to the current President when you’re in the bag for the next one taking power whether he wins the election or not.

It's almost as if they want to wait to see who is going to be President before deciding if that person should be immune or not?

Splindid work, young women! Proud to know you!

I just realised that when I was studying law I would buy the Times every day to read the law reports but if I had had an English and Welsh version of Strict Scrutiny I could have just listened to that but then I realised that maybe the podcast itself should be citeable

We're waiting on the court but do we have to. It's obvious to me the court is twisted in a knot which tells me the final outcome is going to be unsatisfactory. Which tells me the majority of us is not going to want to comply, hence unrest, protest and on.

Why does everything this show brings about the Supreme Court of ultra Activist Republican Judges infuriate me? Thanks!

Why does no one ever mention the all important Bohemian Grove custom of peeing on the trees? (Kate: Hilary of the teddy bears)

The man in the background scared me, lol. 28:39

Vergonia merch please! A flag preferably 😂😂

@gracelloyd3758

6 күн бұрын

Vergonia rainbow flag 😂 and the o is Martha’s face

@MrQueerDuck

4 күн бұрын

YES it needs to be rainbow! With neon pink sequins around the border!? 🏳️‍🌈 So I can send 'em to the entire Alito neighborhood!

Polka Beyonce…I’m in.

Smh so infuriating! Immunity, is literally the easiest one.

❤❤🎉🎉🎉

Do we know if Leah will make the live show tonight?!? 🤞🤞

It felt like I was listening to Ana Gasteyer on Delicious Dish lol

we ain't got no xxxxxxx band Randy

0:33 attempted fist bump

😯

I would check out a Beyonce Polka album.

A petition is created by the public, who was the arrest protecting?

@Gildedmuse

6 күн бұрын

In Gonzalez v Trevina? The petition was to remove the city manager, so I assume the woman was arrested in order to protect the City Manager.

I've watched you and enjoyed your legal commentary on CNN and MSNBC and other legal news programs. The microphone and speaking patterns here are not easy to listen to, and from the engineering view, this means your comprehensibility by audiences - especially in normally, noisy, and varying distractions - makes your current, personal, private-conversation style - is NOT professional and designed for easy comprehension, even in such common, noisy, distracting acoustic backgrounds that your audiences will be trying to listen to you in, even with ear buds, headphones, or straight from external speakers of devices. You may be able to adjust your speaking patterns and practices yourselves, but you may achieve better and quicker improvements of your comprehensibility and ease of listening for the widest range of listeners across age, devices, acoustics of listener environments. Simply using digital audio "normalization" (expansion/compression) to address the natural volume varying loudness and softness levels may help. But getting some help from an audio engineer, especially one experienced in recording/broadcasting spoken dialog, will help you plan and use a better recording/speaking program - so we can ALL hear AND comprehend ALL you say. Specific sound issue to review is sometimes called "vocal fry" - the subtle, but distorting slight growl in one's voice as one drops volume at end of phrases. Normalization processor can help with this, but you may need to actually learn to change your "on air" speaking patterns to eliminate it. You may use some common techniques like imagining you are speaking to someone in a car, on a wide open freeway, while traveling fast, and with all windows in car down - and you want to convey all details of your important legal analysis. Consider gathering samples of audiobooks from library sites, with female narrators, ideally with similar vocal range as each of you. Pick samples that you notice are easier or easiest to listen to at quieter volume as well as at louder volume. Listen to brief samples alternating between your current program recording samples, and the pro-narrator. Just being "public speakers" with high quantity of hours/days "speaking publicly" does not qualify one as an excellent speaker - in the terms of audio engineering, and in respect to comprehensibility of your desired listeners. Can your grandma/grandpa hear ALL of what you are saying? I hope you have great success in all your work. You have great knowledge and insight at your young ages, for serious legal reporting and education. Thank you all.

I love the content ladies, but the vocal fry is just too much.

@SaltheartFoamfollower

6 күн бұрын

I'm in agreement, I wish I could run the audio through a Vocal Fry removing synthesizer.

Strict Scrutiny is being captured by it's audience and is degrading from it's super informed intellectual roots to a bunch of progressive cheerleading and baiting.

@Gildedmuse

6 күн бұрын

How so?

Hiiieeee 🙃🤓 I just finished listening to a couple of my favoritist political bitches over at Hysteria and came right over. They said your channel’s got info I need to hear. So, here I am! 😅Thanks for the content! 🫶🏼

A per curiam decision is supposed to refer to the whole court (9-0), but the Gonzalez decision included a dissent, which seems a bit weird...

@Gildedmuse

6 күн бұрын

I thought that was weird, too, but the court has done it before, most famously in Bush v Gore.

Stop the squeal