Month: January 2019

Posted on

African Tech Roundup - Development Finance Diaries with Musa Sillah and Mohamed Alhadi of the Islamic Development Bank

This podcast features two separate conversations Andile Masuku had with senior executives working for the Islamic Development Bank (IsDB). Both exchanges yielded intriguing insight into the values, investment outlook and business MO of the world’s preeminent provider of sharia-compliant development finance. The first part of this episode features a brief chat with Musa Sillah, the Director of the Africa and Latin America Department at the IsDB. Sillah explains what distinguishes the IsDB from other leading development institutions like the World Bank and the African Development Bank, and offers insight into some of the work they are doing to promote sustainable economic development within the organisation’s 57 member states. The second half of the episode features a conversation with the Lead Fragility and Resilience Specialist at the IsDB, Mohamed Alhadi. Alhadi sheds light on how the IsDB frames the notion of "fragility" and how that informs the development and implementation of constructive policies that deliver real value to the IsDB's membership. Editorial Disclaimer: SPARK is the presenting sponsor of this podcast, which is part of an African Tech Roundup miniseries focused on inclusive economic progress being made in vulnerable states. African Tech Roundup retains full editorial control over all published content. Opinions expressed by the host, Andile Masuku, and his guests, do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the presenting sponsor, SPARK. This podcast series was taped at the fringes of SPARK’s 6th annual IGNITE Conference - a premier gathering of refugees, entrepreneurs, educators, private sector actors, government leaders, academics and NGOs. Image credit: Hala Alghanim
Posted on

Opening Arguments - OA245: More on Barr and the Shutdown

Today's episode covers the William Barr confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee to become the next Attorney General, as well as the ongoing legal battles regarding Trump’s shutdown of the government.

We begin with Barr, who’s proven to be a complex individual.  How did he fare in his testimony before the Senate?  Are there reasons for optimism? Is his notorious memorandum (which we covered in Episode 237) not really that bad?  The answers… are all over the map, and will certainly surprise you.

Then, we discuss the ongoing shutdown, which looks to prove Andrew Wrong by not ending tomorrow.  What are the legal implications?  How are they going to be resolved?  Is there any hope, either politically or legally?  Listen and find out!

Finally, it's time for Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #110 which involves a dentist being sued for malpractice and product liability.  As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on Episode 138 of the Naked Mormonism podcast.  Give it a listen!  And if you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

1. Kamala Harris' statements regarding her opposition to Barr's nomination.2. Former Justice Department official of the George H.W. Bush administration Zachary Terwiliger and the speculation that he will once again be Barr's deputy. 3. Barr’s concerning views on executive power and reasons he has drawn so much criticism. 4. We discuss our past Episode OA 237: Lowering the Barr (Memo) 5. Jonathan Turley, GWU Law professor and gadfly, arguing about Barr 7. Jack Goldsmith, HLS professor, has written a response.  “A Qualified Defense of the Barr Memo: Part I” 8. The 1995 OLC memo: Application of 28 U.S.C. § 458 to Presidential Appointments of Federal Judges 9. 28 U.S.C. § 458: Relative of Justice or Judge Ineligible to Appointment10. Marist polling data on the Shutdown 11. NTEU v. Mulvaney 12. Barr's written testimony

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

Don't forget the OA Facebook Community!

For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

 

Posted on

The Gist - Know Your Memes, or Be Fooled by Them

On the Gist, the knife-wielding skills of Nancy Pelosi.

In the interview, An Xiao Mina has tracked the meme from its goofy origins to its use in anti-authoritarian protest and (more recently) disinformation. What’s next, and how can we minimize the harm caused by the internet’s worst actors? An Xiao Mina is the author of Memes to Movements: How the World's Most Viral Media Is Changing Social Protest and Power.      

In the Spiel, Pelosi can’t go to Afghanistan because Trump is one impetuous manbaby.

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

Posted on

Pod Save America - “Nancy P and Cardi B try to open D.C.”

Pelosi tells Trump he can’t deliver the State of the Union until the government opens, Trump advisors tell him the shutdown is hurting the economy, Kirsten Gillibrand announces for president, Sherrod Brown announces he’s exploring a bid, and Beto O’Rourke takes a road trip to help him decide. Then the Atlantic’s Natasha Bertrand talks to Dan about Attorney General nominee William Barr’s confirmation hearings, and the latest in the Mueller investigation. Also – Pod Save America is going on tour! Get your tickets now: crooked.com/events

Posted on

SCOTUScast - Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert – Post-Argument SCOTUScast

On November 27, 2018, the Supreme Court heard argument in Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, a case considering whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f), which imposes a 14-day deadline for appealing from a grant or denial of class-action certification, can be equitably tolled.
Troy Lambert bought a dietary supplement that claimed to be an aphrodisiac containing sexual performance-enhancing herbs. He thereafter brought a class action in federal district court against the drug’s manufacturer, Nutraceutical Corp., alleging violations of U.S. Food and Drug Administration requirements and various California consumer protection statutes. The district court initially certified the class action, but following reassignment of the case to a new judge and discovery raising concerns about Lambert’s classwide damages model, Nutraceutical moved to decertify the class and the district court granted the motion on February 20, 2015.
On March 2, 10 days after the class had been decertified, Lambert informed the court that he intended to file a motion for reconsideration. The district court instructed him to file the motion within 10 days, which was 20 days in total from the original class desertification. Lambert moved for reconsideration on March 12 with further evidence to support his full refund damages model. The district court denied his motion in June. Fourteen days later, Lambert filed a petition under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) for permission to appeal the district court’s orders granting decertification and denying reconsideration to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit conditionally granted the petition but instructed the parties to address whether it was timely.
Under Rule 23(f), a petition for permission to appeal must be filed with the circuit clerk “within 14 days” after the order “granting or denying class-action certification” was entered. Although Lambert’s petition came within 14 days of denial of his motion for reconsideration, it was filed months after the actual order granting decertification. The Ninth Circuit held that Lambert’s petition was nevertheless timely. Rule 23(f) is not jurisdictional, the court determined, and its deadline should equitably tolled by a timely motion for reconsideration such as Lambert’s. Reaching the merits, the Ninth Circuit then reversed and remanded, holding that the district court had abused its discretion in decertifying the class.
The U.S. Supreme Court, however, granted certiorari to address whether the Ninth Circuit erred when it held that equitable exceptions apply to mandatory claim-processing rules—such as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f)—and can excuse a party’s failure to file timely within the 14-day deadline, in conflict with the decisions of 7 other Circuit Courts of Appeals.
To the discuss the case, we have Michael Morley, Assistant Professor of Law at Florida State University College of Law.
Posted on

New Books in Native American Studies - Alexander S. Dawson, “The Peyote Effect: From the Inquisition to the War on Drugs” (U California Press, 2018)

Peyote occupies a curious place in the United States and Mexico: though prohibited by law, its use remains permissible in both countries for ceremonial practices in certain religions. As Alexander S. Dawson reveals in The Peyote Effect: From the Inquisition to the War on Drugs (University of California Press, 2018), this anomalous position is nothing new, as it existed as far back as the prohibitions on the use of peyote by non-Indians imposed by the Inquisition in Mexico during the colonial period. Though this ban ended with Mexico’s independence, it was not until chemists in Germany and the United States began investigating peyote’s properties in the late 19th century that its usage spread outside of Native American communities. Fears of the drug’s psychoactive effects led to a succession of state-level U.S. bans in the early 20th century, yet these were usually fragmentary in their scope, allowing for its continued usage by Native American communities outside their jurisdictions. The broader use of peyote as a hallucinogen in the 1950s led to more general efforts to outlaw it, yet the exemptions granted for its use by Native Americans in religious practices creates a distinction between them and the larger population akin to the one that existed during the colonial era hundreds of years ago.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/native-american-studies