Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Gaza, genocide, Human Rights, Targeting Muslims, U.S. Militarism, Violations of U.S. and International Law, War Resister
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Separation of Powers And Project 2025
The US Constitution created the three branches of the federal government to serve as a check on one another. In particular, the judiciary was intended to ensure that the actions of the Executive and Legislative branches did not violate the Constitution.
But what happens when the Supreme Court is in the grip of a highly partisan, result-oriented super-majority half of whom were appointed by a President who has been convicted of 34 felonies and faces 57 more felony charges in three different criminal prosecutions, but claims absolute immunity for whatever he did while in office?
And on top of all that, this ex-President – Donald Trump – is a nominee for President of the United States and has promised to “terminate” the Constitution.
Meanwhile, in an almost 1000 page blueprint for the next conservative President titled Project 2025, a group of conservative organizations spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, has laid out a detailed plan under which the President would acquire almost dictatorial power over the entire federal government.
Guest – Marjorie Cohn is professor of law emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and former president of the National Lawyers Guild. She is also Dean of the People’s Academy of International Law and a member of the Bureau of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers. She writes frequent articles about the Supreme Court for Truthout.
—-
Larry Hebert’s Hunger Strike Against US Weapons To Israel
Israel’s deadly and unrelenting assault on Gaza following Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel has had repercussions around the world. In Gaza itself the death toll is approaching 40,000 and the humanitarian crisis worsens every day. In the United States, as students are headed back to campus, colleges and universities are bracing for a new round of protests and counter protests. Israel’s war in Gaza is dividing the Democratic Party just as Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are seeking to unite their party to stop Donald Trump from returning to the White House. Recent surveys show that 48% of Americans oppose Israel’s military action in Gaza, while 42% support it.
Guest – Larry Hebert [pronounced eh-BEAR], a very unlikely candidate to become an outspoken protestor against US military support for Israel, who would gain nationwide and international attention. Larry Hebert is a 26-year old U.S. Air Force Senior Airman and avionics technician assigned to Naval Station Rota in Spain, having served for 6 years in the military. At 10:00 am on Easter Sunday, March 31, 2024 on Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House, Hebert began a hunger strike during an authorized leave from his post. Shortly before his hunger strike, he joined Veterans for Peace, an organization that opposes U.S. military actions.
The organization argues that U.S. weapons shipments to Israel is a violation of U.S. law. In a press release issued by Veterans for Peace, the purpose of Hebert’s hunger strike was described as highlighting “the plight of the starving children of Gaza.” Hebert wore a sign that read, “Active duty airman refuses to eat while Gaza starves,” with a photograph of an emaciated Palestinian infant. Hebert said he was inspired by the self-immolation of 25-year old serviceman Aaron Bushnell, who died on February 25, 2024 outside the Israeli embassy in Washington. Before he died, Bushnell declared he would “no longer be complicit in genocide” in Gaza. Hebert’s hunger strike lasted 9 days but ended abruptly on April 9, when he was ordered to report immediately to Andrews Air Force Base for a return flight to his post in Spain. Hebert is pursuing a release from active duty as a Conscientious Objector.
———————–
Civil Rights, Gaza, genocide, Human Rights, Targeting Muslims, U.S. Militarism, Violations of U.S. and International Law, War Resister
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Healing Divisions Within Jewish Communities Over Israeli War And Destruction
Ever since October 7, the American Jewish community has been deeply divided over how to react to the brutality of what Hamas did that day, the fate of the hostages, Israel’s overwhelming military assault in Gaza, the ensuing humanitarian crisis, the unspeakable death toll suffered by the Palestinians, and the deadly clashes in the West Bank. All of this has spilled over to college campuses across the United States, where pro-Palestinian protestors, including Jews, have been arrested and at UCLA, were attacked by pro-Israel counterprotesters. Many Jews, including family members, can’t talk to each other about any of this. Some observers see a rise in antisemitism, while others complain that political criticism of Israel and its prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is being conflated with antisemitism, in an effort to silence pro-Palestinian voices.
Guest – Rabbi Sharon Brous is the founding and senior rabbi of IKAR, a leading edge Jewish community based in Los Angeles. She has been named #1 Most Influential Rabbi in the U.S. by Newsweek and The Daily Beast. Rabbi Brous blessed both President Obama and President Biden at their National Inaugural Prayer Services in 2013 and 2021. Her popular 2016 TED Talk is called “Reclaiming Religion.” Her work has been featured in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Washington Post. She was featured on the cover of Time magazine, in an issue that examined religious diversity in America.
Rabbi Brous is the author of the national bestselling book The Amen Effect: Ancient Wisdom to Mend our Broken Hearts and World, which we’ll be talking about later in the program. I have know Sharon for almost two decades and I consider her one of the most compassionate people I know with wisdom far beyond her young life.
—-
Money And Class In America – Remembering Lewis Lapham
On July 23, 2024, Lewis Henry Lapham II passed away in Rome, Italy. A nationally respected journalist and author, of 14 books, Mr. Lapham was also the longtime editor in chief of Harper’s, and then founder and editor of Lapham’s Quarterly, Mr. Lapham offered a critical eye toward US domestic and foreign policies. On January 14, 2019, Michael Smith and I, Heidi Boghosian, interviewed the literary giant after his 1988 book, “Money and Class in America” was republished by OR books. His documentary film, “The American Ruling Class” has become part of the curricula in many of the nation’s schools and colleges. In tribute to Lewis Lapham and his legacy, we’re pleased to rebroadcast a shortened version of our one-hour interview.
—-
We are especially pleased and honored to spend the hour with our guest Lewis Lapham. After graduating from Yale in 1956 he started out working as a newspaper reporter in San Francisco and then in New York, where he currently lives and works. The editor of Harper’s Magazine for 20 years, Lapham has written 14 books. Currently, he edits “Lapham’s Quarterly.”
Lapham founded the quarterly magazine in an effort to further the consideration of history, which he calls “the advice and counsel of the past.” He sees history as “a guide to understanding and acting on the issues and ideas before us today.”
Major pillars of the rule of law have been defiled since 911. The edifice still stands, the promises remain, but as a nation, we have suffered huge losses. Last spring Lapham’s Quarterly addressed the topic, “The Rule of Law.” His 1988 book “Money and Class In America” was re-published by OR Books last year with a new introduction by Lapham and a forward by Thomas Frank. We speak with him in our studio today about the contradiction between the rule of the monied rich and the rule of law.
Guest – Lewis Lapham is editor and founder of Lapham’s Quarterlysince 2007 and editor of Harper’s Magazinefrom 1975 to 2006, Lewis H. Lapham is a member of the American Society of Magazine Editors Hall of Fame. He is the author of fourteen books, among them Money and Class in America, The Wish for Kings,Waiting for the Barbarians, Theater of War, and Age of Folly. He produced a weekly podcast,The World in Time, for Bloomberg News from 2011 through 2013. His documentary filmThe American Ruling Class has become part of the curriculum in many of the nation’s schools and colleges. A member of the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, Lapham has lectured at Yale, Princeton, Dartmouth, Stanford, the University of Michigan, and the University of Minnesota.
——————-
Civil Rights, Death Penalty, Human Rights, Prison Industry
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
The California Criminal Legal System Reconsideration
In recent years, District Attorneys around the country in Los Angeles, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and elsewhere have broken the law and order mold as they look for better ways to address public safety, crime, prosecution, and sentencing in America, including a wholesale reconsideration of the death penalty.
To examine the criminal legal system in the United States, we’ve invited one of the leading progressive prosecutors in America, George Gascon, the District Attorney of Los Angeles County, to join us.
Guest – Attorney George Gascon began his career in law enforcement at the Los Angeles Police Department where he worked his way up the ranks from patrol officer to Assistant Chief of Police, overseeing operations for the more than 9,000 LAPD officers Then, in 2006, he was tapped to be Chief of Police in Mesa, Arizona, where he stood up to the hateful and anti-immigrant policies of then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. In 2009, then-Mayor Gavin Newsom appointed Gascón to be San Francisco’s Chief of Police. Two years later, Newsom again turned to Gascón to fill a vacancy created when then-District Attorney Kamala Harris was elected California Attorney General. Gascón was re-elected San Francisco District Attorney twice.
He was the first Latino to hold that office, and the nation’s first Police Chief to become District Attorney. On December 7, 2020, he took office as the DA of LA County. He is also a former board member of the Council of State Governments Justice Center, a graduate of the FBI’s National Executive Institute and a former member of the Harvard University Kennedy School of Government’s Executive Session on Policing and Public Safety.
—-
Maintaining Innocence Under Threat Of Execution: Bill Clark
We may be witnessing the dying days of the death penalty in the United States. 23 states have ended the use of capital punishment, while it remains on the books in 27 states, yet the number of executions are in decline. The U.S. public sector and political leaders are beginning to understand what abolitionists have always known: The death penalty is a relic of our racist past yet discrimination on the basis of race continues to plague the system. 55.8 percent of those executed are white, but 33.9 percent are Black and 8.4 percent are Latino/a, which is gruesomely out of proportion to the national population. Currently, 42 percent of death row inmates are white but a shameful 41 percent are Black.
Today, on Law and Disorder we are focusing on the state of California, where there are 650 inmates on death row, the largest number in the Western Hemisphere. 13 men have been executed since 1978. The last execution was in 2006. Due to a combination of court rulings and a moratorium imposed by Gov Gavin Newsom in 2019, there have been no executions in California in the last 18 years. Five inmates have been officially found innocent, all of whom were people of color. They join the 200 exonorees nationwide. Despite the moratorium in California, 17 people have still been sentenced to death in California — 80% of whom are Black or Latino.
The California Supreme Court is currently deciding whether to take up a historic petition filed in April by a coalition of civil rights and justice organizations arguing that racial discrimination in the administration of the death penalty in California violates the equal protection guarantee of the state constitution. The petition to the state Supreme Court cites more than a dozen studies showing race discrimination. One looked at more than 55,000 homicide cases in California between 1979 and 2018 and found that Black individuals were more than twice as likely to receive a death sentence as white individuals, while Hispanic individuals were 1.5 times more likely to receive a death sentence. California Attorney General Rob Bonta agreed in his response to the petition that the evidence of racial discrimination in capital punishment is “profoundly disturbing.”
So those are some of the facts which describe the capital punishment system in California and the Nation. But today on Law and Disorder we want to go beyond those raw statistics and take a look at the human cost of the death penalty by talking to someone who has been living under the threat of execution for 33 years. Bill Clark’s Film Project
Guest – Bill Clark joins us by phone from prison in Vacaville, California, where he has been housed since March of this year after his transfer from San Quentin, where he was incarcerated for 26 years. I have known Bill for 24 years. Despite his situation, he is a hopeful, resilient and creative person. He was convicted of two murders in the early 1990s and has steadfastly maintained his innocence as he continues to challenge his convictions and death sentences.
————————————
Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, genocide, Human Rights, Targeting Muslims, Violations of U.S. and International Law
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Trump v United States
On July 1, the United States Supreme Court handed down one of the most important decisions in the history of our democracy. In the aptly named case of Trump verses United States, the six arch conservative justices awarded the ex-president – who appointed three of them – a vast and complex criminal immunity scheme.
In three ways the majority delivered Trump a tailor made “Stay-Out-of-Jail” trifecta of expanded constitutional protections for Presidents: First, absolute immunity for crimes committed when a President engages in “core” official acts and a near-conclusive presumption of immunity for other official acts; Second, a brand new rule of criminal procedure making a President’s motives irrelevant; and Third, another new rule excluding evidence of a President’s official acts from a criminal trial for his unofficial acts, which prosecutors offer to prove the ex-president’s prior knowledge and intent.
To help us understand exactly what the Court did and its impact not only on the 91 felony charges currently pending against Trump, but the future of the American presidency and our very democracy, we’ve ask one of our very own co-hosts.
Guest – Stephen Rohde practiced constitutional law for almost 50 years. He’s the author of American Words of Freedom, which examines the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. On issues of civil rights, civil liberties and the Americal political system, he is a regular contributor to Truthdig, LA Progressive, Los Angeles Review of Books, and LA Lawyer magazine. This Fall on Ms. Media, he is launching Speaking Freely: A First Amendment Podcast with Stephen Rohde.
—-
The Palestinian Exception To The First Amendment
The resistance organization Palestine Legal, headquartered in Chicago, was created by our own Michael Ratner and others to resist our governments’ practice of what Michael called “the Palestinian exception to the first amendment.“
This exception to the supposedly protected First Amendment activity of speaking out and organizing by Palestinian solidarity activists is carried out by the repression of the US government nationally and locally. It has never been more ferocious than it is now.
However, the mobilization against the Israeli genocide – carried out with total US support – has not been undeterred by peak anti-Palestinian repression. Palestine Legal has been in the vanguard in defending and promoting the rights of people expressing solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza.
Guest – Dima Khalidi, founder and Director of Palestine Legal. Her work includes providing legal advice to activists, engaging in advocacy to protect their rights to speak out for Palestinian rights, and educating activists and the public about the repression of Palestine advocates. Prior to founding Palestine Legal in 2012, Dima worked with the Center for Constitutional Rights as a cooperating attorney on the Mamilla Cemetery Campaign, submitting a Petition to United Nations officials to stop the desecration of an ancient Muslim cemetery in Jerusalem, and advocating on behalf of Palestinian descendants of individuals interred in the cemetery.
———————————–
Civil Rights, Human Rights, Prison Industry, Supreme Court
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Two Very Important Supreme Court Decisions
When does the government cross the line from using its highly visible bully pulpit to advocate for policies and principles it has every right to promote into the prohibited zone of threatening to use its awesome powers to punish viewpoints it opposes by coercing others to refrain from doing business with the speaker.
In two very important recent decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to decide whether it is still the law of the land that a government entity’s “threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion” against a third party “to achieve the suppression” of disfavored speech violates the First Amendment.
In National Rifle Association v. Vullo, in a rare unanimous opinion written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the Court held that “Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors.”
But the decision in the related case of Murthy v. Missouri, was not unanimous. In that case a federal district judge had ruled that the U.S. Surgeon General (Vivek Murthy) and other government officials violated the First Amendment by seeking to convince social media platforms to remove content the government deemed disinformation about COVID, the 2020 election and other subjects.
But on June 26, the Court punted. A 6 member majority – made up of both conservatives and liberals – held that the plaintiffs did not have standing. In dissent, three conservative justices said they would have found standing and on the merits they would have found a First Amendment violation.
Guest – Attorney David Cole argued the NRA case in the Supreme Court. He’s been the National Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) since 2016. He previously served as a staff attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights. He has litigated a wide array of major civil liberties controversies and has personally argued 8 cases before the US Supreme Court and served as counsel in more than 30.
—-
Abolition Labor: The Fight To End Prison Slavery
Operating in the secrecy of the nation’s more than 1,800 prisons, a kind of shadow slave culture is being fostered. Few Americans are aware of the exploitative and pervasive practice of forced prison labor. The 13th amendment to the US Constitution abolished slavery, but it made one exception: prison labor.
Prisoners are forced to work with minimal or non-existent wages, and often with no labor protections. Understanding the scope and implications of forced prison labor is crucial for anyone concerned with social justice and equity. It calls for a re-examination of our treatment of incarcerated persons and for alternatives that promote fairness for everyone, regardless of their legal status. By shining a light on this issue, we can advocate for reforms that prioritize rehabilitation over punishment and strive towards a more just and humane criminal justice system. A new book, Abolition Labor: The Fight To End Prison Slavery, provides an eye-opening overview of the extent of this problem.
Guest – Andrew Ross is a renowned social activist, author, and Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis at New York University, where he also directs the Prison Research Lab. Andrew has contributed to prominent publications like The Guardian, The New York Times, and The Nation. He has authored or edited over twenty-five books, with the recent work, Abolition Labor, co-authored with Aiyuba Thomas and Tommaso Bardelli.
Guest – Aiyuba Thomas recently earned his M.A. from NYU’s Gallatin School of Individualized Study and is an affiliate of the NYU Prison Research Lab. He currently serves as project manager for the Movements Against Mass Incarceration’s archival oral history project at Columbia University. There, he documents the experiences and challenges faced by those affected by the criminal justice system. His firsthand perspective and his extensive knowledge on the subject makes him a powerful voice in the conversation of abolishing forced prison labor.
—————————————-
Civil Rights, Gaza, genocide, Human Rights, U.S. Militarism, Violations of U.S. and International Law, War Resister, Whistleblowers
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Freedom For Julian Assange!
After serving 1901 days in solitary confinement in a tiny cell in the infamous Belmarsh prison in London, journalist and publisher Julian Assange is free at last.
Julian gained his freedom pursuit to a plea bargain with the government of the United States which had sought to extradite him and try him under the 1917 Espionage Act. He faced a certain conviction in a hostile Virginia court and 175 years in prison on 17 counts of conspiracy to commit espionage for receiving and publishing information damaging to the United States government.
Julian Assange was forced to plead guilty to one count of espionage in return for the time he has served in prison. Prior to that he was confined for seven years in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he had sought and received political asylum.
The alleged crime he was accused of committing was the receipt and publication in 2010 of the so-called Iraq and Afghanistan war logs which document American government guilt in torture and murder including the 11 civilians and two Reuters journalists.
Julian Assange was sentenced to time served by an American federal court judge on an island in the Pacific Ocean 2000 miles from Australia. Julian Assange will now be living as a free man in Australia with his wife and two children.
Until Julian Assange Is Pardoned Press Freedom Remains At Risk – article by co-host attorney Stephen Rohde
Guest – Randy Credico, a steadfast supporter of Julian Assange. Mr. Credico. hosted the program “ Countdown to Freedom” in support of Julian for many years. He had visited him in Belmarsh prison.
—-
War Crimes, Dictators and the ICC
The International Criminal Court (ICC) along with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) were set up in 1998 in order to help prevent wars and crimes against humanity with the profound understanding that without a system of international law. a future World War III might eliminate humanity.
The United States of America, under Bill Clinton, was one of seven countries that voted against the Rome statute which set up the International Criminal Court. Clinton did eventually sign the statute but George Bush “unsigned“ it and the United States has had a testy relationship with the court. Indeed under Trump, the US imposed sanctions on the court and its prosecutor.
Last month Imran Khan, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, issued arrest warrants for Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Galant, the Israeli Minister of Defense for war crimes and crimes against humanity. The ICC also issued arrest warrants for three top leaders of Hamas.
Guest – Attorney Reed Brody, was a friend, colleague, and mentee of our late cohost Michael Ratner. Reed Brody is the author of the recently published book To Catch a Dictator: The Pursuit and Trial of Hissene Habre. He has worked for many years with Human Rights Watch. Reed Brody has helped pursue the dictators Augusto Pinochet of Chile and Jean-Claude “ Baby Doc” Duvalier of Haiti. He has uncovered atrocities by US backed Contras in Nicaragua, led United Nations missions in El Salvador and the Congo, and exposed Bush administration torture.
—————————————-
