Lawyers Guild, The - Wednesday, June 10, 2026

Follows the audio · click any line to jump

1. That is 1-877-KPFKAUTO.
2. And learn more.
3. This is David Archuleta, and you are listening to KPFK 90.7 FM Los Angeles,
4. one of the last truly people-powered free speech radio stations around.
5. KPFK is all about real music, real voices, real community, and giving people a platform without corporate control.
6. And right now, during their fun drive, they need your support more than ever.
7. So if you believe in independent radio, fearless conversation, amazing music, and keeping community voices alive, please support KPFK today.
8. Call 818-985-5735. That's 818-985-5735.
9. Option 2, that's 818-985-KPFK
10. or donate online anytime at kpfk.org slash donate.
11. Keep free speech radio alive
12. and thank you for supporting the magic of KPFK.
13. Hey, this is Michael O'Keefe.
14. You're listening to KPFK 90.7 Los Angeles,
15. 98.7 Santa Barbara,
16. 93.7 San Diego,
17. and 99.5 Ridgecrest and China Lake.
18. Radio powered by the people.
19. Thank you.
20. Thank you.
21. Thank you.
22. Thank you
23. The program that you're about to hear is a rebroadcast and has previously aired here on KPFK.
24. good afternoon friends good afternoon and welcome to this week's edition of the lawyer's guilt show
25. I'm Jim Lafferty along with my co-host Maria Hall. Maria, how are you dear?
26. Oh, well, you know what they say, I'm fine.
27. You're fine.
28. Trying to not watch the news, unfortunately.
29. I know, I know, but that's the thing, isn't it?
30. I know.
31. We've got an interesting show today, as always, but we have our friend Mr. Rodeon.
32. So I can't let you, you want to tell us about it?
33. I just get right to the introduction.
34. Oh, sure. No, I'll just give a shout out to Steve Rohde because he always gives us so much good, great information. So, yeah, please stay tuned. We're going over a lot very quickly. It'll be another speed round today.
35. That's right.
36. Yes, once again this week, friends, we're going to devote our entire show to reviewing some court cases and some other recent legal developments in America, including a bombshell of an opinion by the U.S. Supreme Court just this morning.
37. So you'll want to stay tuned for all of that.
38. And our guest, fortunately, is once again a constitutional scholar and activist, Stephen Rohde.
39. Mr. Rohde is an author of two books, numerous articles, and book reviews on constitutional law and history.
40. He's the former president of the ACLU Foundation of Southern California,
41. a special advisor on free speech and the First Amendment for the Muslim Public Affairs Council,
42. and he's the host of a new podcast called Speaking Freely, produced by Ms. Studios,
43. and, well, it's available on Spotify, iHeartRadio, and other streaming platforms.
44. I should mention that Steve
45. Rohde and myself and Maria Hall
46. are co-hosts of a national public
47. affairs show as well, it's called
48. Law and Disorder
49. it's now airing on close to 200
50. stations around the country, you can go to our website
51. Law and Disorder and
52. hear all the old shows, find out when the new
53. shows are coming and so forth, but Steve
54. Rohde, for now, welcome to this week's
55. edition of the Lawyer's Guild Show
56. Thank you so much Jim
57. and Maria, this is
58. such a terrific opportunity for me to gather my thoughts, pay attention and try
59. to explain what the hell is going on in this country Well that some task and you do it well Steve as I said a moment ago I think we had some bad news today
60. Certainly this very morning, the U.S. Supreme Court announced a decision
61. that further guts, really, I don't know what's left to gut,
62. further guts the Voting Rights Act, thereby further disenfranchising Black voters.
63. What were the facts in the case and why does this ruling by the majority of the justices
64. represent a further gutting of the act?
65. This is a case called Louisiana versus Calais, C-A-L-L-A-I-S.
66. I think I'm pronouncing that correctly.
67. It comes out of Louisiana.
68. It is a terrible blow to the American people, to the American voter, to minority voters
69. struggling to overcome centuries of racial discrimination and voter suppression.
70. And it is also a terrible attack on separation of powers and the role that Congress plays
71. in our government.
72. So we've had the 1965 Voting Rights Act since then.
73. Section 2 is a special provision.
74. This act of course grew out of the power granted under the 14th Amendment and the post-Civil
75. War amendments to redress racism in our country.
76. Unfortunately the Republican Party has made it a pillar of their platform to destroy voting
77. rights, to limit voting rights so that they as a minority party in so many states and
78. regions can control our elections and therefore control all three branches of government.
79. In 1980, in a case called City of Mobile v. Bolden, the court said that the only kind of discrimination that could be redressed by the Voting Rights Act was intentional dilution of minority votes.
80. Well, Congress confronted that and in the 1980s passed amendments to the Voting Rights Act strengthening Section 2.
81. so that discriminatory effect or results of gerrymandering could also come within the purview of the Voting Rights Act.
82. Well, in 2013, in Shelby County v. Holder, Chief Justice Roberts began the assault,
83. striking down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act,
84. and now we have this law, this result today.
85. What this six to three highly partisan majority did
86. was they overturned a Louisiana redistricting,
87. which was intended to redress racial discrimination
88. that had previously existed in other redistricting.
89. Lower courts had upheld what Louisiana was doing,
90. but today, only hours ago, that six-member,
91. super conservative majority struck it down.
92. I would like to discuss this case in more detail
93. on a future program For now I will say that Justice Kagan in a dissent on behalf of the three of the women on the court and the progressives called it a demolition of the Voting Rights Act
94. Now a state, quote, can, without legal consequences, systematically dilute minority citizen voting power.
95. An expert on voting rights, Rick Hazen, said this will go down in history as one of the most pernicious and damaging Supreme Court decisions of the last century.
96. And it is a slap at Congress as well as the American people.
97. We don't know how this will play out in the midterm elections coming up very shortly in our country.
98. It's obviously intended to help Republicans.
99. And finally, I have to say that this court and our nation has to come and have a reckoning.
100. Can race be considered in crafting remedies to overcome racial discrimination?
101. We are confronting that issue in diversity, equity, and inclusion, in affirmative action, and elsewhere.
102. the Supreme Court acts like it is blind to the continuation of racial discrimination in this
103. country and we're going to have to confront that as a nation. Yes indeed yes indeed well a sad day
104. as I say. Steve continue with the Supreme Court for a minute but not necessarily a case
105. a couple of the justices have been speaking out in rather unusual ways of late have they not
106. I'm thinking of Justice Clarence Thomas and his speech blasting progressivism and the threat that progressivism supposedly poses for America.
107. Talk to us about this development.
108. Yes. On April 15, Thomas gave a one-hour speech at a law school at the University of Texas at Austin.
109. He set out to condemn progressivism, but I think he ended up exposing his profound ignorance of American history and the depths of his dangerous partisanship, and he has reopened the whole question about his ethical violations on the court.
110. he has tried to promote the notion that we enjoy God-given rights
111. that's his term
112. and that our government exists to protect our God-given inalienable rights
113. this is such a violation of separation of church and state
114. he cites the Declaration of Independence
115. which does speak about our rights coming from our creator
116. But what he forgets is that after the Declaration of Independence, we got the U.S. Constitution, which was an answer to the Declaration.
117. And it specifically provided that there should be no religious test for public office.
118. And in the First Amendment, it created a wall of separation between church and state.
119. I have had the distinct opportunity to write an article on this for LA Progressive newspaper.
120. You'll be seeing that published over the weekend.
121. And I'm pleased to be able to expand on why Thomas's remarks are so dangerous
122. and his mean-spirited and ill-informed attack on progressivism
123. fails the test of any freshman college American history student, but he is one of nine people
124. with so much power on the Supreme Court. Yes, indeed. Yes, indeed.
125. Well, Steve, let's go on to the issue of governmental overreach. In a court ruling,
126. a federal judge vacated a Robert Kennedy Jr. declaration and permanently blocked Trump's
127. trans youth care hospital threats. What is this all about? Well, as we become accustomed on this
128. radio show and elsewhere, there are some wins and there are some losses to talk about. This is
129. definitely a win. U.S. District Judge Mustafa Kasube issued a blistering 49-page written opinion
130. vacating the Robert Kennedy Jr. Declaration. Now last December 2025 as
131. head of the Health and Human Services Kennedy issued a declaration threatening
132. to revoke all federal funding including Medicare and Medicaid from any hospital
133. or provider that offer gender affirming care for transgendered youth.
134. This decision last Saturday vacates that declaration nationwide.
135. It eliminates the legal basis for roughly 40 hospitals cited when they
136. shuttered their trans youth care programs earlier this year, and it bars the Trump
137. administration from implementing the declaration or any materially similars
138. for their federal funding for offering gender affirming care.
139. Notice even in that the courts are waking up. 600 lawsuits have been filed
140. against this administration, actually upwards of 700, multiple injunctions and
141. they're gaining knowledge that the Trump administration and the DOJ will try to
142. evade those rulings by switching the name they give to a policy that has just
143. been enjoined and this judge was farsighted enough to say that this
144. declaration and any material similar policy is enjoined they cited they
145. called it a bald-faced lie that the Kennedy declaration amounts to nothing
146. more than one man's musings on gender affirming care they said the court is
147. not persuaded by defendants attempts to gaslight it into believing that the
148. Kennedy declaration does anything other than what it says the in these days
149. that's becoming common the judge said unserious leaders are unsafe there is
150. nothing more serious than our leaders dedication to the rule of law so that we
151. might maintain the integrity of our constitutional democracy. This case
152. highlights a leader's unserious regard for the rule of law. This case
153. demonstrates how disregard for the rule of law does not merely result in an
154. abstract infraction. Rather and tragically this case is one of a long
155. of examples of how a leader wanton disregard for the rule of law causes very real harm to very real people This is a major step forward Of course this case will be appealed and end up in the U Supreme Court
156. And we can only hope they will come to their senses when the case reaches that.
157. Continuing on the good news side, a Pennsylvania court has ruled that the state constitution of that state, Pennsylvania,
158. does indeed provide the right of abortion.
159. Talk to us about this case.
160. This is very important to show about the strength of state courts and state constitutions.
161. If the U.S. Supreme Court is going to trash the U.S. Constitution and is the last word on U.S. constitutional law,
162. unless overridden by constitutional amendments, the state courts and the state constitutions,
163. which in many respects, including here in California, provide greater protection for individual rights than does the federal constitution,
164. certainly as interpreted by the current Supreme Court.
165. The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, which is the intermediate appellate court for state agency disputes,
166. ruled 4-3, it was a close call, granting summary judgment to a group of abortion providers
167. who challenged the constitutionality of a state statute prohibiting the use of Medicare funds for abortion.
168. The appellate court granted summary judgment based on the state's equal right amendment
169. that prohibits sex-based discrimination specifically.
170. As such, the block on Medicare funds targeting only people who are pregnant violates that amendment.
171. The ruling is stark contrast to what's developing in the federal courts.
172. We all know the tragic ruling in 2022 in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization,
173. which struck down a federal constitutional right to abortion.
174. The pro-publicly praised this decision, saying that a woman's ability to access reproductive care should never be determined by her income.
175. It should be a right, and that's been protected by this court, and we'll track that case as it works through the higher court system.
176. Well, thank you for that.
177. And Steve, a federal appeals court ruled that Trump's ban on asylum claims at the border is illegal.
178. This was a terrifying question and issue.
179. So tell us about the case and whether you think the Supreme Court will rule the same if and when the case is appealed to the high court.
180. This is a very important case because it sweeps across immigration law in this current Trump era.
181. It affects scores of people facing these efforts to turn back existing immigration law.
182. So in a two-to-one decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld an earlier ruling by a district judge that Donald Trump had to adhere to the requirements outlined in the Immigration and Nationality Act and could not categorically deny asylum claims from people crossing from Mexico into the United States.
183. Existing immigration law said the leading judge in this case does not allow the president to remove plaintiffs under summary removal procedures of his own making Judge Michelle Child speaking for the two majority said that she rejected the
184. administration's view of the law, which would allow it to, quote, unilaterally and needlessly
185. return individuals even to countries where they will most certainly face prosecution.
186. The administration now has 45 days to ask for the court to be, the case to be
187. reheard before the full appellate court and of course it could appeal directly
188. to the Supreme Court. Trump's attempts to enact this sweeping ban is rooted in a
189. proclamation he signed the day he took office in his second term. He simply
190. declared there was an invasion along the southern border and invoked what he
191. He called his inherent right and duty of the executive branch to defend our national sovereignty.
192. Implementing that proclamation, the Department of Homeland Security blocked people from applying for asylum other than at a designated port of entry.
193. The judge in this case ruled against Trump.
194. There was a partial dissent by a Trump-appointed judge who claimed the lower court lacked authority to issue such a broad ruling.
195. Lee Gelnart, an ACLU attorney who argued the appeal, praised the ruling, saying the case was about, quote,
196. human hardship and the separation of powers and that the judges made clear that the president
197. lacks the power to unilaterally override laws passed by congress so i want to emphasize one
198. more time that these are cases in which congress has already acted what the president is doing
199. is not only violating the rights of these asylum seekers but also the power of congress yes indeed
200. Indeed. Well, continuing on, the U.S. Justice Department, the Justice Department, has now targeted, excuse my voice, hundreds of citizens in a new push to denaturalize those citizens.
201. How have they gone about doing this? And is what they're doing, in your opinion, legal, constitutional?
202. Well, I want to put it on everyone's radar that the next battle, not just at our borders, not just with people here with green cards, but citizens, to denaturalize U.S. citizens.
203. The Department of Justice has identified 384 foreign-born Americans whose citizenship it wants to revoke.
204. It has alerted civil litigators in the Department of Justice in 39 regional offices that they could soon be assigned to file denaturalization cases.
205. Under federal law, the government may seek a court to strip the citizenship of people who obtained it fraudulently,
206. fraudulently, for instance, by entering into a sham marriage or by withholding information
207. about their past that would have made them ineligible. Some who commit crimes here in the
208. United States can be denaturalized, but the government must present evidence to a federal judge
209. through a civil or criminal proceeding, making the process, it could be challenged and
210. time A Justice Department spokesman said the officials were pursuing a high volume of decentralization referrals in history The problem is that this is set against
211. what has been done in the past. It was in the McCarthy era and other eras that
212. denaturalization has been used against those with whom the government disagreed
213. politically and use this as a pretext to expel them from the United States. Amanda Frost,
214. a law professor at the University of Virginia, said the message it sends is that naturalized
215. citizens don't have the same rights and stability as native-born citizens. The government has used
216. this power in the past to target people it views as political opponents. As of 2024, there were
217. more than 818,000 immigrants had become American citizens. The naturalized citizens do enjoy
218. almost all of the rights and responsibilities of native-born citizens. A notable exception is
219. foreign-born citizens cannot run for president. We're going to watch these cases carefully because
220. they are setting up a new avenue for the Trump administration to go after those
221. that it disagrees with and wants to expel from this country. Exactly. Well, Steve, a lawsuit was
222. filed in Maryland on April 20th alleging that Trump's anti-DEI executive order violates the
223. First Amendment. Who filed this lawsuit and what do you see as its chances of success?
224. This is a very important case and I'm glad it's been filed and I want to monitor it as it moves
225. along. It relates, frankly, to issues I raised at the top of this program in talking about the
226. Supreme Court and the Voting Rights Act because part and parcel with that attack, Trump has gone
227. after, diversity, equity, and inclusion, making it a dirty concept in this country to try to redress
228. racial discrimination that has marked our country from its founding and has yet to be eradicated.
229. Donald Trump's executive order in this case directed agencies to cancel federal contracts
230. and subcontracts with businesses that engage in what he called racially discriminatory
231. diversity, equity, and inclusion activities.
232. They claim in the new lawsuit that this violates the First Amendment.
233. This case was brought by the National Association of Diversity Officers of Higher Education,
234. the American Association of University Professors,
235. the United Academics of Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park, the National Association of Minority Contractors,
236. and NAMC, District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia chapters.
237. They were complaining that this broad, vague March 26 executive order violates free speech and associational rights
238. of federal contractors and subcontractors by misconstruing the concept of DEI to equate it, illegal DEI,
239. with any discussion of race and ethnicity and to confuse that with racially discriminatory activities and policies.
240. The suit says that the president attempts to use intimidation to coerce contractors and subcontractors from abandoning their lawful DEI efforts under threat of civil and criminal prosecution and the loss of federal business opportunities for noncompliance.
241. This case was brought on behalf of university professors, contractors, and subcontractors, and it will seek a preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting the President and these agencies from implementing the March 26 executive order.
242. Skye Perryman, the president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which represents the plaintiff, said in a statement that Trump's latest EO defies both law and reality.
243. She said that the order is unlawful and would have disastrous consequences for workers doing the public's business throughout the country, but also for millions of people who rely on the work and services that contractors, subcontractors, their employees and partners provide.
244. So this is a very important case. I'm glad it's filed by such a prominent civil rights organization, and we're going to monitor it closely.
245. Yes, good. Well, Trump's been sued. He's been sued now. Why? For firing most of the black officials in the government. Who brought this lawsuit and what are the facts of the case?
246. This is another powerful lawsuit. I am just so proud of all of the lawyers from various public interest law firms that are doing this work.
247. I've said repeatedly on your show that these lawsuits are necessary but not sufficient to resist Trump.
248. They are a parallel to the No King's Day protests and all the work that the rest of us are doing in the streets and elsewhere.
249. But here, Alvin Brown, a Democrat member of the National Transportation Safety Board,
250. he was nominated by President Biden, was fired from his post in May of 2025.
251. In his lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court,
252. he said that political differences could not have been the main reason for his firing
253. and that he claims that 75% of black officials at independent agencies have been fired under Trump.
254. At the time of Mr. Brown's removal from the NTSB, there were two other Democrats serving on the board.
255. Since Brown's firing, he's accusing it of being racially motivated.
256. it therefore violated Mr. Brown's constitutional rights under the Fifth Amendment.
257. The lawsuit also points to people of color being dismissed at agencies including the National Labor Relations Board,
258. the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Federal Reserve, and the Library of Congress.
259. And the lawsuit cited Trump's attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs
260. and the fact that Brown was replaced by John DeLue,
261. who is white.
262. This is one case because it has to be factually based
263. to have standing to bring a case of this nature.
264. But the implications of this case are widespread
265. and may finally put the lie to what Biden to what Trump has been doing Yes Oh I was going to say it does look like it a good time for our break
266. Yes.
267. We have a very quick station ID break.
268. Let's go for that.
269. And then I have another burning question for Steve when we return.
270. The wicked world
271. Searching for light
272. In the darkness of insanity
273. I ask my sins
274. Hello, I'm Ian Masters, the host of Background Briefing,
275. available 24-7 at backgroundbriefing.org
276. and heard on KPFK Mondays through Thursdays at 5pm
277. and on Sundays at 11am.
278. Background Briefing looks into three or four of the important stories
279. and issues of the day to provide an in-depth daily briefing with context, history, and insight from
280. the best-informed guests closest to the scene who offer analysis and details often overlooked by the
281. soundbite-driven media more and more controlled by Trump-friendly oligarchs. So if you want facts
282. and information to inform a motivated majority to save our democracy before it's stolen next
283. November, tune in Mondays to Thursdays at 5 p.m. and on Sundays at 11 a.m. for your background
284. briefing here on KPFK 90.7 FM Los Angeles and worldwide at kpfk.org.
285. This is Gary Oldman. You're listening to radio powered by the people, KPFK 90.7 FM.
286. And we are back with you here on the Lawyers Guild Show. I'm Jim Lafferty,
287. along with Maria Almond, the host. We're interviewing Steve Rohde, a great author,
288. activist, constitutional scholar. Maria, you were about to ask a question when we kicked that break.
289. Yes, I was. Let's go on with our interview since we're doing the speed round today.
290. Rapid fire questions. So let's go now to the Department of Justice or back to the Department
291. of Justice, which has just dropped its criminal investigation of federal, from the chairman
292. Jerome Powell, and has referred the matter to the inspector general.
293. Tell us about this.
294. It's been a little bit of a roller coaster.
295. Well, this is such an example of how Trump and the Department of Injustice have weaponized
296. the powers granted to them once they took office.
297. They brought a terrible, groundless criminal prosecution against Jerome Powell, who is the head of the Federal Reserve.
298. He's chair of the Federal Reserve.
299. They cooked up this criminal investigation, alleging that he made false statements to Congress
300. about cost overruns in the Federal Reserve's ongoing
301. headquarter renovation during a Senate Banking Committee panel last June.
302. Janine Pirro announced she was closing this criminal investigation
303. into Jerome Powell.
304. This time they didn't even wait for a judge to throw it out.
305. This is a new form of taco as far as Trump is concerned, always chickening out.
306. Under U18 USC code 1001 it is a criminal offense to knowingly and willfully make false statements to Congress with a penalty of up to five years imprisonment Powell had
307. characterized this investigation as a politically motivated pressure campaign.
308. It was akin to the other prosecutions which the government has brought and I
309. I guess we shouldn't let this go by without mentioning that James Comey has now been re-indicted,
310. even after the first charges were dropped, this time for organizing some shells on a beach with the saying 86-47.
311. That's what they're alleging was a threat against the president.
312. Well, in this case, and maybe that one someday soon, they dropped the charges against Jerome Powell.
313. And I heard he announced today that he's staying on as a member of the Federal Reserve, even if not as chair.
314. Yes, indeed.
315. Well, the Southern Poverty Law Center, one of the great institutions in the country that fights for civil rights, civil liberties.
316. but the Department of Justice has just filed an indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center.
317. Why? Well, the Southern Poverty Law Center has paid informants that it places in violent right-wing groups.
318. What are the further facts of this case, and what is the legal basis for the Department of Justice indictment here?
319. This is a terrifying criminal indictment against one of the most prominent and leading civil rights organizations, the Southern Poverty Law Center, that has been fighting the Ku Klux Klan and other terrorists and extreme groups in the United States for decades.
320. These Trump DOJ lawyers obviously stay up at night combing through the statutes to try to figure out some kind of criminal charge they can bring.
321. The very bringing of these charges requires now the Southern Poverty Law Center to divert money to hire lawyers to be distracted through subpoenas and other steps in this criminal case.
322. What the Justice Department did is they indicted the SPLC on Tuesday, accusing the nonprofit of having, quote, secretly funneled over $3 million to extremist hate groups and networks like the Ku Klux Klan via wire fraud, false statements to banks, and a money laundering conspiracy.
323. Wow, would that be a shocking indictment if only it was true.
324. What are they talking about?
325. They are talking about the fact that for years the Southern Poverty Law Center has used anonymous
326. undercover agents who have infiltrated these organizations, who have pretended for years
327. on end of being true believers of the Ku Klux Klan and these other groups
328. gathering information which has then been made public and in many cases
329. turned over to state and federal governmental agencies to prosecute the Ku Klux Klan and these other hate groups The DOJ has tortured those facts as if the Southern Poverty Law Center was secretly funneling
330. money to the organizations that it was investigating.
331. The SPLC has a history of surveilling and monitoring white supremacist and hate groups.
332. It has used paid informants and field sources in order to gather that kind of accurate information.
333. And it has publicly and within federal proceedings and state proceedings told the world that it was doing this once those informants had extricated themselves and turned over their evidence.
334. what Glenn Kirshner, a former U.S. Army prosecutor
335. and former assistant U.S. attorney in the District of Columbia
336. with 30 years of experience, he said this,
337. the government wants to put them through the ringer
338. and chill similar organizations.
339. Prosecutors, he said, regularly use informants.
340. This is the federal government saying,
341. do as we say not as we do. It's a constitutionally protected right for
342. these groups to engage in activities, publish reports, provide information and
343. the DOJ and the FBI themselves have long benefited from information collected by
344. these groups. Todd Blodgett, a former paid FBI informant, said it wasn't news to
345. me. He once owned the largest neo-Nazi record label as well as an advertising firm that worked
346. with far-right racist groups like Liberty Lobby and he was a paid FBI informant. The indictment
347. alleges that informants behaved and spoke in racist ways that went against the non-profit's
348. and that this should be considered evidence of fraud.
349. This is another case I can't wait for the first motion to dismiss to reach a federal judge.
350. I think this will be thrown out.
351. I would hope that the Southern Poverty Law Center would be able to win sanctions for this.
352. It is one of the grossest examples of weaponizing the Department of Justice against these groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center.
353. Let's not forget that as far as the Ku Klux Klan and these other hate groups are concerned, Trump recently granted clemency and pardons to the individuals convicted for their actual acts of terrorism and insurrection on January 6, 2021.
354. So this is a shocking example.
355. it's meant to threaten and intimidate other organizations, I'm sure that the Southern Poverty Law Center will fight back strongly.
356. And I can't wait to announce on this program that that indictment has been dismissed.
357. Yes.
358. Thank you for that.
359. You know, the financial situation of Donald Trump and his family has vastly improved.
360. since his return to the White House last year. But the question of whether it's legal for all
361. of them to profit from his position as president, and that's been playing out in the courts.
362. So please enlighten us, what is the latest? Well, I was so thrilled to see this ruling. It came in
363. on the last day of March. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Trump is civilly liable
364. for damages that he caused on January 6, 2021.
365. Judge Mehta filed a 79-page ruling in a case that denied Trump civil immunity.
366. The judge gave a careful analysis devoted to distinguishing between Trump's criminal actions as an officeholder,
367. for which the Supreme Court anointed him with absolute immunity, versus his actions in seeking
368. office, which are not official acts and therefore are not immune from civil or criminal punishment.
369. The decision by this judge, carefully follow the Supreme Court's immunity ruling,
370. and will allow claims against him from members of Congress and Capitol Police officers to proceed to trial.
371. After a prior ruling that Trump's speech on the ellipse plausibly amounted to incitement,
372. which is a narrow exception to the First Amendment,
373. Trump's legal team sought to substitute the United States of America as the defendant in place of the president, claiming that what he did and said on January 6 was part of his employment as president of the United States.
374. That motion was denied. The judge said that whether Trump was speaking or engaging in conduct in an official capacity as an officeholder or instead in an unofficial capacity as an office seeker was an issue for the court to decide.
375. The immunity itself, the case, the famous immunity decision itself, recognized that there may be contexts in which the president, notwithstanding the prominence of his position, speaks in an unofficial capacity, perhaps as candidate for office or party leader.
376. That's quoting from the U.S. Supreme Court.
377. And that's exactly what the plaintiffs who brought this civil case for damages.
378. All of this means that Trump's $4 billion empire could be up for grabs when they win a judgment and go to collect it.
379. Well, of course, Trump's never shy about suing and bringing outrageous lawsuits.
380. He's now sued the IRS for $10 billion.
381. dollars. What's the latest news in this case? This is just remarkable. He has sued the IRS
382. for wrongfully revealing and leaking his tax returns. This is a $10 billion lawsuit against
383. his own IRS Now U District Judge Kathleen Williams has asked Trump private lawyers and in the Department of Justice to explain whether Trump control over the IRS means that he suing himself
384. She pointed out, quote, although President Trump avers that he is bringing this lawsuit
385. in his personal capacity, he is the sitting president and his named adversaries are entities
386. whose decisions are subject to his direction.
387. She wrote in her order,
388. it is unclear to this court whether the parties are sufficiently adverse to each other
389. so as to satisfy the Constitution's case or controversy requirement.
390. What I love about this case is that Trump and the right wing
391. has been crowing about the unitary executive theory for decades.
392. that he is at the top of the government and he controls everything.
393. Well, that means he controls the IRS, which is the entity he is suing.
394. This one is really important.
395. Trump himself said, this is very interesting,
396. we're thinking about doing something for charity, I'll give money to charity.
397. But separately, in a separate legal case, he said,
398. I'm suing myself, right?
399. So he can never hold back.
400. He said the secret part out loud.
401. I think this is a powerful claim.
402. The judge has set briefing by May 20 and hearing on May 27.
403. And I am eagerly looking forward to the judge's ruling,
404. throwing out his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS.
405. Yeah, maybe he'll even dismiss it voluntarily. Who knows?
406. Taco, taco.
407. So in a similar vein, Donald Trump also sued the Wall Street Journal for $10 billion for reporting on his Epstein ties. And now Kash Patel is following that lead by suing the Atlantic for defamation.
408. But Steve, isn't there a very high bar for public figures to sue the media for defamation in the United States?
409. You bet. And this federal judge in Florida knows the law and applied it.
410. Judge Darren Gales in Florida, a U.S. District Judge, threw out Trump's $10 billion defamation suit against the Wall Street Journal and against Rupert Murdoch, his former friend, I guess.
411. The judge said that under the New York Times v. Sullivan case, public figures can only
412. prevail in a defamation case if they prove what was published was made a false statement
413. with actual malice, meaning that they had knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard
414. of the truth.
415. This was an article last year in which a sexually suggested letter that the newspaper said bore
416. Trump's signature and was included in that 2003 album compiled for Epstein's 50th birthday.
417. The Wall Street Journal had researched that.
418. They allowed included in the article Trump's denial.
419. The judge wrote whether President Trump was the author of the letter or Epstein friends are questions of fact that cannot be determined at this stage in the litigation He gave them a brief period of time to file an amended complaint if they could come up with any new facts
420. but he gave them till last Monday, and I just did a search and no new complaint was filed that I can find.
421. So this could be another taco. The Dow Jones Corporation that publishes the Wall Street Journal said we stand behind the reliability, rigor and accuracy of the Wall Street Journal's reporting. And they went toe to toe with Trump. They wouldn't settle that case as other media outlets have done. And that score one for the free press.
422. Indeed. Well, there's been an important ruling, talking about separation of church and state now, an important ruling from a federal appeals court in Texas having to do with public schools and, of course, those Ten Commandments and the posting thereof. Tell us about this.
423. Yes, very troubling. In a narrow 9-3 ruling by the Fifth Circuit, en banc, meaning that they reversed two lower court decisions, including a decision of their brethren,
424. and ruled by one vote that Texas can require public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom in the state.
425. This was a law signed by Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, in 2025,
426. and various families of different faith backgrounds filed a lawsuit challenging it.
427. It's really part of this broader conservative push to infuse Christianity into public schools.
428. The Texas law mandates the displays be placed in a conspicuous location in each classroom on a typeface visible from anywhere in the room.
429. The posters must be at least 16 inches wide and 20 inches tall and must include the text of a particular version of the Ten Commandments.
430. Lower court judges had struck down this law, saying it was a clear violation of the First Amendment separation of church and state.
431. state. The Louisiana Attorney General celebrated the ruling, but others like the teachers involved
432. were deeply troubled. Lena Lee, a high school English teacher in Keller, Texas, a Fort Worth
433. suburb, called the decision devastating. She said students in Texas are being unjustly used as pawns
434. in this game of conservatism. Schools should not be a battleground for conservatives
435. to push their agenda.
436. Well, just in our last two minutes here, Steve,
437. we do have May Day coming up on Friday.
438. Listeners can go to maydaystrong.org to find local rallies.
439. But in honor of that freedom to protest,
440. let's end our discussion with a little comic relief
441. and a sigh of relief.
442. And of course, I'm speaking of the case of the protester
443. wearing a seven-foot inflatable penis costume.
444. What was she charged with?
445. What's the outcome?
446. And why should people continue to protest?
447. Well I do hope everyone will take May Day this Friday very seriously No school no purchases no business We hoping to have a small impact on the American economy to show how robust our resistance really is And as you
448. indicated, people can go to a variety of sites to find rallies and events near them. But I do want
449. to lift up Renee Gamble, this courageous woman in Fairhope, Alabama, who wore a giant inflatable
450. penis costume to her rally on the earlier No Kings protest in October of 2025. A retired
451. sign language interpreter, she was one of a thousand people who attended an anti-trump
452. a rally in Fairhope, a small city on the eastern shore of Mobile Bay. Her sign wore No Dick Tator,
453. D-I-C-K-T-A-T-O-R, and a police officer came up with her and complained that the giant inflatable
454. member was causing a public spectacle and potential traffic hazards. When she refused to deflate
455. and remove the costume, things got physical.
456. He wrestled the 62-year-old woman to the ground, cuffed her,
457. struggled to subdue and then stuff the outsized erection into a squad car.
458. In all of it, she fought back, calling herself Aunt Tifa.
459. Prosecutors later tacked on extra charges for the wordplay
460. and disturbing the peace.
461. Now, the judge,
462. Jaime Sendeker,
463. would have none of it.
464. He heard brief testimony
465. in his courtroom
466. and he threw the criminal case out.
467. She was supported
468. and it's a good day
469. for the First Amendment.
470. Yes, it is.
471. Yes, it is.
472. Well, that's all the time
473. we have today, certainly, too.
474. The Lord's Guilt Show.
475. We thank you, Steve Brody,
476. as always, for being our show.
477. We thank all those listening to us.
478. We urge you all to stay healthy, my friends.
479. And if there was ever a time when you needed to stand up for your rights, this is that time.
480. We urge you to do that, and we'll be back with you as soon as we can.
481. The program that you just heard was a rebroadcast.
482. It previously aired here on KPFK.
483. Hello, I'm Ian Masters, the host of Background Briefing,
484. available 24-7 at backgroundbriefing.org
485. and heard on KPFK Mondays through Thursdays at 5 p.m.
486. and on Sundays at 11 a.m.
487. Background Briefing looks into three or four
488. of the important stories and issues of the day
489. to provide an in-depth daily briefing
490. with context, history, and insight
491. from the best-informed guests closest to the scene
492. who offer analysis and details often overlooked
493. by the soundbite-driven media
494. more and more controlled by Trump-friendly oligarchs.
495. So if you want facts and information
496. to inform a motivated majority to save our democracy before it's stolen next November,
497. tune in Mondays to Thursdays at 5 p.m. and on Sundays at 11 a.m. for your background briefing
498. here on KPFK 90.7 FM Los Angeles and worldwide at kpfk.org.
499. This is Ralph Nader, and you're listening to Radio Powered by the People,
500. KPFK, 90.7 FM Los Angeles, 98.7 FM Santa Barbara,
501. and across the globe at kpfk.org.
502. 🎵