Month: December 2015

Posted on

The Gist - How Stand-Up Got Its Name

On The Gist, historian Kliph Nesteroff shares a few favorite tales from comedy’s mobster past. He’s the author of The Comedians: Drunks, Thieves, Scoundrels, and the History of American Comedy. For the Spiel, the ordinary American focus group participant. Today’s sponsors: Stamps.com, where you can buy and print official U.S. postage right from your desk using your own computer and printer. Use the promo code THEGIST to get a no-risk trial and a $110 bonus offer. Berries. Fresh berries dipped in chocolate, starting at just $19.99 are a great last-minute gift and double your berries for just $10. Visit berries.com, click on the microphone, and use the code GIST. Join Slate Plus! Members get bonus segments, exclusive member-only podcasts, and more. Sign up for a free trial today at slate.com/gistplus.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Posted on

Serious Inquiries Only - AS196: Tommentary on Tump, Eli Bosnick Followup

I’ve got a couple Tommentary items to talk about that I promise aren’t trigger warning or safe space related… But then after that I go into the Eli Bosnick adventures both Cog Dis and I have had. I did a lot more research into the fact claims and came out in a pretty different place … Continue reading AS196: Tommentary on Tump, Eli Bosnick Followup →

The post AS196: Tommentary on Tump, Eli Bosnick Followup appeared first on Atheistically Speaking.

Posted on

SCOTUScast - Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins – Post-Argument SCOTUScast

On November 2, 2015, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins. Robins sued website operator Spokeo, Inc. under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, complaining that Spokeo had published inaccurate personal information about Robins. The district court determined that Robins had failed to allege an injury-in-fact and dismissed the case for lack of standing. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, concluding that Spokeo’s alleged violations of Robins’ statutory rights constituted sufficient injury, and that Robins satisfied the other requirements for Article III standing. -- The question Spokeo raises before the Supreme Court is whether Congress may confer Article III standing upon a plaintiff who suffers no concrete harm, and who therefore could not otherwise invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court, by authorizing a private right of action based on a bare violation of a federal statute. -- To discuss the case, we have Erin Hawley, who is Associate Professor of Law at University of Missouri School of Law.
Posted on

SCOTUScast - Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company – Post-Argument SCOTUScast

On December 2, 2015, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Liberty Mutual) operates a self-insured employee health plan through a third-party administrator. Vermont state law requires such plans to file with the State reports concerning claims data and certain other information. When Vermont subpoenaed claims data from Liberty Mutual’s third-party administrator, Liberty Mutual sued and argued that the federal Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) preempted the Vermont statute. The district court found no preemption and ruled in favor of Vermont. On appeal a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed and held that ERISA preemption did apply. -- The question before the Court is whether the Second Circuit erred in holding that ERISA preempts Vermont's health care database law as applied to the third-party administrator for a self-funded ERISA plan. -- To discuss the case, we have John Ohlendorf, who is an associate at Cooper & Kirk, PLLC.
Posted on

The Gist - Is Cryotherapy BS?

On The Gist, the incredibly cool Maria Konnikova of the New Yorker looks into the dearth of research into cryotherapy for a game we call “Is That Bulls--t?” Her new book, The Confidence Game, is now available for preorder. For the Spiel, we travel to the four corners of the world in search of happiness. Today’s sponsors:   Harry’s, the shaving company that offers German-engineered blades, well-designed handles, and shipping right to your door. Visit Harrys.com for $5 off your first purchase with the promo code THEGIST. Berries. Fresh berries dipped in chocolate, starting at just $19.99 are a great last-minute gift and double your berries for just $10. Visit berries.com, click on the microphone, and use the code GIST.   Join Slate Plus! Members get bonus segments, exclusive member-only podcasts, and more. Sign up for a free trial today at slate.com/gistplus.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Posted on

SCOTUScast - Luis v. U.S. – Post Argument SCOTUScast

On November 10, 2015, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Luis v. U.S. Luis was indicated for Medicare fraud involving alleged kickbacks to patients who enrolled with Luis’ home healthcare companies. The government then brought a civil action to restrain Luis’ assets--including substitute property of an equivalent value to that actually traceable to the alleged fraud--before her criminal trial. Although Luis objected that she needed these assets to pay for defense counsel, the district court ruled in favor of the government and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit affirmed. -- The question before the Supreme Court is whether the pretrial restraint of a criminal defendant's legitimate, untainted assets (those not traceable to a criminal offense) needed to retain counsel of choice violates the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. -- To discuss the case, we have John Malcolm, who is Director of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, and the Ed Gilbertson and Sherry Lindberg Gilbertson Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation.