Minimum Competence

Andrew and Gina Leahey
Minimum Competence

The idea is that this podcast can accompany you on your commute home and will render you minimally competent on the major legal news stories of the day. The transcript is available in the form of a newsletter at www.minimumcomp.com. www.minimumcomp.com

  1. HÁ 1 DIA

    Legal News for Tues 2/11 - CFPB Shutdown by President Musk, Legal Battles over Doge Access to Federal Data and Growing Concerns about Conflicts of Interest

    This Day in Legal History: Birth of Edison On February 11, 1847, Thomas Edison was born, eventually becoming one of the most prolific inventors in history. While best known for innovations like the phonograph and the incandescent light bulb, Edison’s impact extended beyond technology—he played a major role in shaping intellectual property law. Over his lifetime, he was granted 1,093 U.S. patents, making him one of the most successful patentees in American history. His aggressive pursuit of patent protection and enforcement helped define modern patent law, particularly in the fields of invention ownership and licensing.   Edison was no stranger to legal battles. He frequently sued competitors for patent infringement, ensuring that his company, General Electric, maintained control over key technologies. One of his most significant legal disputes involved motion picture technology. His company used patents to create a near-monopoly on filmmaking equipment, leading to the formation of the Motion Picture Patents Company (MPPC), also known as the Edison Trust. This organization aggressively enforced its patents, preventing independent filmmakers from using essential equipment without licensing fees.   However, Edison’s legal tactics also sparked resistance. Independent filmmakers and rival inventors challenged his monopolistic control, leading to court rulings that gradually weakened the MPPC. In 1915, a federal court ruled against Edison’s film patents, breaking up his trust and setting a precedent for future antitrust actions in the entertainment industry. Edison’s extensive use of patent law demonstrated both its protective power and its limits, influencing later legal battles over intellectual property. His legacy continues to shape debates over patent rights, innovation, and monopolistic practices in technology and media. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) was established in 2010 to oversee financial institutions and protect consumers from abusive practices. It played a key role in regulating mortgage lenders, payday loan companies, and credit reporting agencies, introducing rules against predatory lending, deceptive banking fees, and unfair debt collection practices. The agency was instrumental in holding financial institutions accountable after the 2008 financial crisis, issuing billions in fines and refunds for consumers. Over the weekend, the CFPB was effectively shut down under the leadership of acting chief Russell Vought, who suspended all oversight activities, halted its funding, and closed its headquarters. His actions were met with swift legal challenges from the National Treasury Employees Union, which argued that gutting the agency violated congressional authority. Critics condemned the move as a severe rollback of consumer protections, leaving banks and lenders without federal oversight. The agency’s dismantling has also raised concerns about conflicts of interest. Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) was granted administrative access to CFPB systems, a controversial move given that Musk’s platform, X, is looking to enter financial services. Union officials claim Musk is trying to take control of his own regulator. The situation has drawn protests from agency workers and legal threats from advocacy groups who argue the actions amount to a systematic effort to remove consumer protections. Consumer protection agency neutralized by Trump's new chief | Reuters A federal judge declined to block Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency from accessing the U.S. Department of Labor’s systems, dealing an early blow to unions opposing his efforts to shrink the federal workforce. The lawsuit, brought by the AFL-CIO, argued that Musk could gain access to sensitive government investigations into his own companies—Tesla, SpaceX, and The Boring Company—as well as information about competitors. However, U.S. District Judge John Bates ruled that the union had not yet demonstrated harm, though he expressed concerns about the situation. AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler called the decision a setback but vowed to present stronger evidence. Critics argue that Musk’s access to government data, including labor investigations and economic statistics, poses a serious conflict of interest. The White House maintains that Musk will recuse himself from matters involving his businesses, but as a special government employee, he is not subject to full federal ethics rules. DOGE’s growing authority has sparked alarm, with unions and advocacy groups challenging its reach. Another lawsuit has temporarily halted DOGE’s access to Treasury Department records over concerns about unauthorized data sharing. Meanwhile, Musk has already moved to shutter the U.S. Agency for International Development, canceling contracts and leases as part of his broader push to restructure federal agencies. Judge declines to block DOGE from Labor Department systems | Reuters This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

    5min
  2. HÁ 2 DIAS

    Legal News for Mon 2/10 - President Musk's DOGE Blocked from Treasury, DOJ Shifts to Immigration (and away from terrorism), Trump's Federal Worker Buyout and CFPB Shuttered

    This Day in Legal History: 25th Amendment to the US Constitution  On February 10, 1967, the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, establishing clear procedures for presidential succession and addressing concerns about vacancies in the executive branch. The amendment was a response to historical ambiguities in presidential succession, particularly after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963. Prior to its ratification, the Constitution provided little guidance on what to do if a president became incapacitated. The amendment formally allowed the vice president to assume the presidency if the president died, resigned, or was removed from office. It also established a process for filling a vacant vice presidency, a critical change since several vice presidents had died or resigned without a designated replacement mechanism.  Additionally, it provided a procedure for a president to temporarily transfer power to the vice president, such as in cases of medical procedures. The amendment’s fourth section allowed for the removal of a president deemed unable to discharge the duties of the office, though this provision has never been invoked. The first use of the amendment came in 1973 when Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned, and President Nixon appointed Gerald Ford as his replacement. The amendment was invoked again in 1974 when Nixon resigned, making Ford the first unelected president in U.S. history. Since then, the temporary transfer of power provision has been used several times for medical reasons, including during surgeries for Presidents Reagan, George W. Bush, and Biden. The 25th Amendment remains a critical safeguard, ensuring stability and continuity in the executive branch. A federal judge has temporarily blocked Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency from accessing certain Treasury Department data and ordered the destruction of information already obtained. The ruling follows a lawsuit filed by 19 Democratic-led states against President Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, alleging that allowing Musk’s team access to personal financial data violates federal law.  The judge found the states likely to succeed on the merits and cited risks of data exposure and hacking. The lawsuit argues that the administration implemented the policy without public explanation or a privacy impact assessment, violating the Administrative Procedure Act. The order prevents Treasury from granting access to unqualified individuals and mandates background checks for those with clearance. Meanwhile, a separate lawsuit filed by unions has also led to a temporary restriction on access to Treasury systems. The White House defended DOGE’s role as a government efficiency initiative, while critics, including Senator Ron Wyden, accused the administration of misleading Congress about the extent of Musk’s involvement. A hearing is set for February 14 to determine whether a longer injunction will be issued. Musk’s DOGE Blocked From Treasury Data in State AGs Lawsuit (1) The Justice Department is shifting resources from traditional priorities like counterterrorism and white-collar crime to focus on immigration enforcement under President Trump. Prosecutors are being reassigned to border districts, and the FBI’s joint terrorism task forces have been directed to assist with immigration initiatives. Additionally, US Marshals and DEA agents now have the authority to make immigration arrests. Attorney General Pam Bondi has ordered investigations into sanctuary jurisdictions and instructed DOJ units to prioritize foreign bribery cases linked to cartels over other white-collar crimes.  Critics, including congressional Democrats, warn that diverting resources in this way could increase crime and weaken national security. Legal experts argue that pulling experienced prosecutors for immigration cases carries a steep opportunity cost, while counterterrorism specialists say their methods are not suited for handling migration. The move reflects a broader effort by the Trump administration to maximize the DOJ’s role in immigration enforcement early in the new term, learning from past efforts to reshape asylum law and border policies. Border Focus Pulls DOJ Resources From Terrorism, White Collar A U.S. judge will soon decide whether President Trump’s buyout offer to two million federal workers can proceed. The plan, which offers employees pay through September if they resign now, has been challenged by federal workers' unions, arguing that Congress has not approved funding for it. Overseen by Elon Musk and his newly created Department of Government Efficiency, the initiative is part of Trump’s broader effort to downsize the federal government.  Democrats and unions have raised concerns over Musk’s growing influence and DOGE’s access to sensitive government data. While 65,000 employees have reportedly accepted the buyout, unions warn that the administration may not honor the deal. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has already faced shutdown-like actions, with staff ordered to stop work and the agency temporarily closed. Meanwhile, Trump has hinted at further cuts, including in the Pentagon, as legal challenges continue to mount against his sweeping restructuring efforts. Judge to review Trump's buyout offer to government workers | Reuters The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has been effectively shut down under the leadership of acting chief Russell Vought, who ordered staff to halt all regulatory activities and cut the agency’s funding. The move eliminates federal oversight of financial companies, drawing sharp criticism from consumer advocates and Democratic lawmakers. The National Treasury Employees Union sued to block Vought’s actions, arguing they undermine Congress’ authority. Critics also raised concerns about Elon Musk’s involvement, as his Department of Government Efficiency has gained administrative access to CFPB systems, despite Musk’s business interests in the financial sector. Agency employees and unions accuse Musk of trying to take control of his own regulator. Vought also ordered the agency’s headquarters to close for a week and shut down public communications. The shutdown is part of Trump and Musk’s broader effort to restructure the federal government, prompting legal challenges and public protests. Consumer protection agency neutralized by Trump's new chief | Reuters This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

    6min
  3. HÁ 5 DIAS

    Legal News for Fri 2/7 - DOJ Hiring Freeze, Memo Raises Concerns about DOJ Independence, Lawsuit over USAID Cuts and Last Minute Merger Filings Under Old Rule

    This Day in Legal History: 11th Amendment Ratified On February 7, 1795, the 11th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, restricting federal judicial power over lawsuits against states. The amendment was a direct response to the Supreme Court’s 1793 decision in Chisholm v. Georgia, which held that a private citizen of one state could sue another state in federal court. This ruling alarmed many states, as it threatened their sovereign immunity and exposed them to lawsuits from individuals.  In reaction, Congress swiftly proposed the 11th Amendment, which was ratified by North Carolina on this day, completing the necessary approvals. The amendment states that federal courts cannot hear cases against a state brought by citizens of another state or a foreign country. This reinforced the principle of state sovereignty and limited the reach of the federal judiciary. The amendment effectively overturned Chisholm and set a precedent for later expansions of state immunity. Over time, the Supreme Court interpreted the amendment broadly, extending protections to cases brought by a state’s own citizens as well. The 11th Amendment remains a cornerstone of federalism, shaping the balance of power between states and the national government. Federal agencies have pulled out of law school recruiting events following President Donald Trump’s executive order freezing hiring across the government. More than a dozen agencies withdrew from NYU’s public interest career fair, and others skipped a similar event hosted by Georgetown and George Washington University. The freeze, which affects federal legal jobs and prestigious honors programs at agencies like the DOJ and IRS, has left many law students scrambling for alternatives. While some large law firms are looking to hire displaced junior lawyers, there are limited openings, especially for first- and second-year students whose summer jobs were canceled.  Firms like Morgan Lewis, Quinn Emanuel, and Elsberg Baker & Maruri are among those actively considering affected candidates. However, with most Big Law summer associate spots already filled, many students may struggle to secure positions. The freeze, which could last up to 90 days, is part of a broader effort to reduce the federal workforce through attrition and “efficiency” measures. Trump Hiring Freeze Has Agencies Ditching Law School Recruiting For decades, the Justice Department has prided itself on independence, with attorneys expected to uphold the law "without fear or favor," as former Attorney General Merrick Garland emphasized. This principle, strengthened after Watergate, has long guided DOJ lawyers in their duty to serve the nation rather than any single president. However, Attorney General Pam Bondi’s new memo marks a stark departure from that tradition, warning DOJ lawyers against refusing to advance legal arguments they disagree with and referring to them as the president’s lawyers.  The memo threatens disciplinary action, including termination, for attorneys who decline to sign briefs or appear in court due to personal objections. Critics argue that this undermines legal ethics and pressures attorneys to prioritize loyalty to Trump over their professional responsibilities. Historically, DOJ lawyers who found themselves in ethical conflicts could ask to be reassigned or resign, but Bondi’s directive appears designed to force them into compliance or out of the department entirely. The memo is particularly concerning as Trump’s DOJ aggressively defends controversial executive actions, making it harder for lawyers to voice concerns about weak or legally questionable cases. Legal experts worry that a mass exodus of experienced attorneys could damage the department’s credibility, further eroding trust in the rule of law. Bondi Raises Independence Concerns with Attorney Advocacy Memo The Trump administration is facing a lawsuit from the American Federation of Government Employees and the American Foreign Service Association over its rapid dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The suit, filed in federal court, argues that President Trump’s foreign aid freeze and subsequent orders to halt USAID projects were unconstitutional and have caused a global humanitarian crisis. Since Trump’s executive order on January 20, USAID staff have been laid off or placed on leave, and key aid programs combating malaria, HIV, and global hunger have been suspended. The shutdown, largely overseen by Elon Musk, has left food aid worth $340 million stranded and led to worsening health crises, according to the lawsuit. Critics argue that since Congress created USAID by statute, Trump lacks the legal authority to dismantle it. The lawsuit seeks an emergency court order to restore funding, reopen offices, and prevent further agency cuts. Trump administration sued by government workers over cuts to USAID | Reuters Companies are rushing to file merger notifications before a new Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rule takes effect after 5 p.m. on Friday, significantly expanding reporting requirements for deals over $126.4 million. The rule, introduced under President Biden and set to take effect under President Trump, is expected to triple the workload for companies seeking regulatory clearance. Businesses are scrambling to file under the old rules to avoid higher compliance costs and navigate a familiar system rather than being among the first to test the new requirements. While attorneys don’t see the rush as an attempt to evade scrutiny, some worry that the surge in filings—combined with Trump’s push to shrink the federal workforce—could result in inadequate review of certain deals. The private equity industry has strongly opposed the rule, arguing it places unnecessary burdens on firms, and has filed a lawsuit to block it, though no ruling is expected this week. Some lawmakers are considering legislative action, and attorneys are closely watching for any last-minute delays, though chances of a suspension are diminishing. Companies wary of new US rule scramble to file mergers by Friday, lawyers say | Reuters This week’s closing theme is by Gustav Mahler. Gustav Mahler, one of the most influential late-Romantic composers, was known for his expansive symphonies that bridged the worlds of the 19th and 20th centuries. Born in 1860, Mahler's music often grappled with deep philosophical and existential themes, blending moments of beauty, nostalgia, and turmoil. His Symphony No. 4, completed in 1900, is one of his most accessible works, offering a lighter, more lyrical approach compared to his more intense symphonies. On February 7, 1904, Mahler himself conducted a performance of this symphony in Berlin, reinforcing its place in the concert repertoire. The fourth movement, "Das himmlische Leben" (The Heavenly Life), is the symphony’s heart and soul, featuring a soprano voice describing a child's vision of heaven. Unlike the grandeur of Mahler’s other finales, this movement is delicate and dreamlike, with folk-like melodies and a sense of innocence. The lyrics, drawn from the Des Knaben Wunderhorn (The Boy’s Magic Horn) collection, depict a paradise filled with music, dancing, and endless feasting, all with a touch of Mahler’s characteristic irony. The orchestration remains light and transparent, with delicate bells and strings giving the music an ethereal quality. As this week’s closing theme, "Das himmlische Leben" serves as a gentle farewell, offering a moment of reflection and tranquility. Its serene and almost childlike optimism provides a perfect contrast to the weightier legal discussions, reminding us that even in complex times, beauty and simplicity endure. Without further ado, Gustav Mahler’s Symphony No. 4, the fourth movement, “Das himmlische Leben” – enjoy.  This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

    16min
  4. HÁ 5 DIAS

    Legal News for Thurs 2/6 - Bondi DOJ Shake-up, Google Scrapping DEI Hiring, Musk's Federal Buyout Plan, Bondi's Crackdown on Dissenting DOJ

    This Day in Legal History: Permanent Court of Arbitration Established On February 6, 1900, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) was officially established following the ratification of the 1899 Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. This marked a major step toward institutionalizing peaceful dispute resolution between nations. The PCA, headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands, became the first international tribunal designed to arbitrate conflicts between states, offering an alternative to war.  While not a court in the traditional sense, the PCA provides administrative support for arbitral tribunals, helping resolve territorial, trade, and investment disputes. Recognizing the need for improvement, the 1907 Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes refined its procedures, further solidifying arbitration as a legitimate mechanism for international law. Over the years, the PCA’s role expanded beyond state-to-state disputes to include cases involving international organizations, corporations, and even individuals.  Today, it operates out of the Peace Palace, home to other key legal institutions like the International Court of Justice. With 109 member states, the PCA continues to handle complex cases, from border conflicts to environmental agreements. Its existence laid the groundwork for later international legal bodies, such as the International Criminal Court and various UN tribunals. By promoting arbitration over conflict, the PCA has helped shape a more structured and rule-based international legal order. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced a major shift in the Justice Department’s white-collar enforcement priorities, scaling back efforts in foreign lobbying transparency and foreign bribery cases. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) unit will now focus on bribery cases tied to transnational crime, such as those facilitating human smuggling, drug trafficking, and arms dealing. Other FCPA investigations with no such connection will be deprioritized. Similarly, Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) enforcement will be limited to cases resembling traditional espionage by foreign government actors. The Justice Department’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section will focus more on civil enforcement and regulatory guidance rather than aggressive criminal prosecutions. These changes mark a significant pullback from the increased enforcement seen over the past decade, particularly under Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Bondi also disbanded the National Security Division’s corporate enforcement unit, an initiative championed by Biden-era Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. It’s unclear if the division will continue prioritizing corporate crime linked to adversarial nations like China and Iran. These policy shifts were part of a broader series of announcements as Bondi took charge as the nation's top law enforcement official following her confirmation on Tuesday night. Bondi Diminishes Justice Department White Collar Enforcement (1) Google is ending its diversity-based hiring targets and reviewing its broader diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, aligning with a broader corporate trend of scaling back such efforts. The company previously set a goal in 2020 to increase leadership representation from underrepresented groups by 30% by 2025, but Chief People Officer Fiona Cicconi told employees that Google would no longer pursue aspirational hiring goals. This shift follows years of public DEI commitments, especially after the 2020 protests over police killings of George Floyd and other Black Americans. Google had also begun evaluating executives on diversity metrics, but recent SEC filings show it removed language reaffirming its DEI commitments. The Alphabet Workers Union (AWU) criticized the move, calling it part of a broader anti-worker trend in the tech industry. Meanwhile, Google cited legal considerations as a federal contractor, stating it is reviewing compliance with court decisions and executive orders affecting DEI policies. Google will maintain internal employee groups such as “Black Googler Network” and “Trans at Google.” The company’s decision follows similar DEI cutbacks at Meta and Amazon, amid increasing conservative pushback and legal challenges after the Supreme Court’s 2023 affirmative action ruling. Google scraps diversity-based hiring targets | Reuters More than 40,000 federal employees have signed up for the Trump administration’s buyout offer, which promises pay through September if they resign by the end of February. This represents about 2% of the federal civilian workforce, with officials expecting a surge in applications before the Thursday deadline. The initiative is part of President Trump’s second-term effort to reduce the size of the federal government, led by Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who heads the Department of Government Efficiency. The White House initially projected that 5% to 10% of federal workers might accept the offer. Federal employee unions oppose the plan, questioning its legality and enforceability. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has warned workers that job cuts are likely, with agency restructurings and layoffs expected. However, key employees in defense, immigration, law enforcement, and postal services are exempt from the deal. With nearly 298,000 federal employees eligible for retirement in the next two years, the administration’s strategy could significantly reshape the workforce. Union leaders, like Everett Kelley of the American Federation of Government Employees, have urged workers to reject the offer, calling it misleading and driven by unelected billionaires. Musk ‘Buyout’ Taken by 40,000 Federal Workers as Deadline Nears - Bloomberg On her first day as U.S. Attorney General, Pam Bondi issued a directive stating that Justice Department lawyers who refuse to advance legal arguments on behalf of the Trump administration could face termination. The memo warns that attorneys who decline to sign briefs, delay cases, or impede the department’s mission may be disciplined or fired. The move is part of a broader effort by Trump appointees to assert control over the Justice Department, which has already seen firings and reassignments of career lawyers. Bondi also announced a review of criminal and civil cases brought against Trump and his supporters, including prosecutions related to the January 6 Capitol attack. This "Weaponization Working Group" will scrutinize cases Republicans claim were politically motivated under the Biden administration. Additionally, Bondi scaled back enforcement of foreign influence laws, stating that criminal cases will only be pursued in instances resembling “traditional espionage”, shifting the focus to civil enforcement. These laws, which require individuals lobbying for foreign governments to register as foreign agents, were previously used to prosecute several Trump associates. Bondi’s directive reflects Trump allies’ long-standing complaints that career DOJ attorneys obstructed his policies, such as resisting lawsuits against Yale’s admissions practices and refusing to defend the 2017 travel ban. The memo asserts that DOJ lawyers cannot substitute their personal views for the administration’s legal agenda. Trump's attorney general says lawyers who refuse orders could be fired | Reuters This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

    7min
  5. 5 DE FEV.

    Legal News for Weds 2/5 - Bondi Confirmed, Federal Worker Union Sues Over Resignation Plan, Farmers Fight PFAS Contamination in NM

    This Day in Legal History: Switch in Time that Saved Nine On February 5, 1937, President Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed a controversial plan to expand the U.S. Supreme Court, a move that became known as the “court-packing” plan. Frustrated by the Court striking down key New Deal programs, Roosevelt sought to add up to six new justices, arguing it would make the Court more efficient. His plan allowed the president to appoint an additional justice for each sitting justice over the age of 70 who refused to retire. Critics saw this as an attempt to undermine judicial independence and tilt the Court in Roosevelt’s favor. The proposal faced strong bipartisan opposition, including from members of Roosevelt’s own Democratic Party. While the plan ultimately failed in the Senate, the political pressure had an effect. Soon after, the Court began ruling in favor of New Deal legislation, a shift sometimes called “the switch in time that saved nine.” This shift preserved Roosevelt’s policies without requiring changes to the Court’s structure. By the early 1940s, Roosevelt had the chance to appoint multiple justices as vacancies naturally occurred. The controversy reinforced the principle of judicial independence and the separation of powers. It also set a precedent that court expansion efforts would be met with significant resistance. The court-packing episode remains relevant in modern debates over judicial reform. It serves as a historical lesson on the limits of presidential power and the resilience of the judiciary. Roosevelt, despite his immense political influence, could not force structural changes to the Supreme Court. The episode highlights the delicate balance between the executive and judicial branches, ensuring no single branch dominates the government. Pam Bondi was confirmed as U.S. Attorney General in a 54-46 Senate vote, positioning her to lead the Justice Department amid significant shifts under the Trump administration. Bondi, a longtime Trump ally, takes over as the department faces internal upheaval, with interim leadership forcing out officials involved in cases related to the January 6 Capitol attack. She has pledged to restore what she calls an "equal, fair system of justice" and to end the "partisan weaponization" of the DOJ.   Since Trump took office, the DOJ has realigned its priorities, focusing on immigration enforcement while reducing emphasis on other areas. One of Trump’s first executive orders directed the agency to address alleged "weaponization" of law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Bondi supports this effort, vowing to enforce the law vigorously while backing the administration’s policy shifts.   Her tenure is expected to bring further changes, including tensions between the DOJ and the FBI. Recently, the FBI was asked to provide names of employees involved in January 6 investigations, prompting lawsuits from agents concerned about retaliation. Critics warn that the administration’s moves risk politicizing the DOJ and eroding institutional knowledge as career officials depart. Bondi Confirmed as Trump’s Attorney General to Lead DOJ Shake-Up - Bloomberg The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) is suing the Trump administration to stop its voluntary resignation program, "Fork in the Road," arguing it violates federal law. The program allows federal employees who resign by February 6 to continue receiving pay and benefits through September 30, but requires them to waive their right to sue their employer. The union claims this promise is illegal under the Anti-Deficiency Act, which prohibits federal agencies from committing funds before Congress approves them.   Congress has only authorized funding for most agencies through March 14, meaning agencies cannot guarantee salaries beyond that date. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, is the latest challenge to efforts by Trump and Elon Musk to reduce the federal workforce. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) argues that the resignation offer is legal because it does not provide “additional compensation.”   AFGE has received thousands of complaints from employees, saying the program forces staff to work extra hours while raising concerns about whether the government will honor its commitments. The Justice Department has not yet responded to the lawsuit. Federal Worker Union Sues to Stop Trump's Resignation Offer (1) Farmers in Curry County, New Mexico, are at a critical juncture in their fight against PFAS contamination from Cannon Air Force Base, with a key court hearing set for February 7. Art and Renee Schaap, once owners of a thriving dairy farm, were forced to slaughter their entire herd after discovering dangerously high levels of PFAS in their water supply. The chemicals, linked to firefighting foam used by the military, rendered their milk unsellable and their land contaminated.   A legal battle over the government’s responsibility is unfolding, with the Schaaps’ case becoming a test for broader national litigation. The Pentagon has requested dismissal of all claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act, arguing that its use of PFAS-containing foam was discretionary and therefore not subject to lawsuits. The government is also resisting cleanup demands under Superfund laws, which could delay remediation efforts.   If the court allows lawsuits to proceed, affected farmers and businesses may finally receive compensation and quicker environmental cleanup. Meanwhile, concerns over PFAS exposure continue to grow, with nearby cheese processors and residents installing costly water filtration systems to protect against contamination. The Air Force has begun cleanup efforts, including a planned $73 million water treatment facility, but obstacles remain, including regulatory changes and the lack of proven PFAS destruction technologies.   For now, the Schaaps and other local farmers face uncertainty, with their land value in question and their future livelihoods at risk. The case’s outcome could determine whether the military is held accountable for widespread PFAS contamination affecting communities nationwide. Farmers Ruined by PFAS Face Key Moment in Fight Against Donald Trump’s proposal to eliminate taxes on tips may seem like a win for hospitality workers, but it risks deepening wage inequities and further entrenching the service industry’s reliance on gratuities. While tipped workers might see short-term benefits, the policy would leave out millions of low-wage workers in non-tipped sectors, such as retail or manufacturing, exacerbating disparities. It could also push more workers into precarious, tip-dependent jobs rather than stable, salaried positions. By making tips tax-free, employers may feel even less incentive to raise wages, worsening income instability for workers who already rely on inconsistent gratuities. The plan also ignores existing discrimination in tipping, which could become even more entrenched in an unregulated tip-based economy. Instead of piecemeal solutions that favor certain workers over others, policymakers should focus on raising the federal minimum wage and eliminating the tipped minimum wage exemption. The tipped minimum wage has been stuck at $2.13 per hour since 1991, despite inflation reducing its value over time. Phasing it out and aligning it with the federal minimum wage would offer workers more stability, ensuring they earn a livable income independent of customer generosity. A broader increase in the minimum wage is also necessary, as the current $7.25 rate, set in 2009, has failed to keep pace with inflation. While tax-free tips may sound appealing, they don’t address the root causes of wage insecurity. True reform would prioritize fair pay for all low-wage workers, creating stability and reducing financial precarity across industries. Trump’s Tax-Free Tips Proposal May Sound Good But Is a Risky Bet This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

    7min
  6. 4 DE FEV.

    Legal News for Tues 2/3 - Trump Eyes Alien Enemies Act, Prosecutor Warns Those that Obstruct Musk, a $754m Legal Fee and Federal Funding Cuts Paused

    This Day in Legal History: George Washington Unanimously Elected On February 4, 1789, George Washington was unanimously elected as the first President of the United States by the Electoral College, setting a precedent for democratic governance under the newly ratified Constitution. His election marked the formal beginning of the executive branch, shaping the legal and political framework of the young nation. On the same date in 1801, John Marshall was sworn in as Chief Justice of the United States. Marshall’s tenure, spanning 34 years, would profoundly influence American law, particularly through landmark decisions like Marbury v. Madison, which established judicial review. His leadership solidified the Supreme Court as a coequal branch of government. Decades later, on February 4, 1945, the Yalta Conference began, with President Franklin D. Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin meeting to discuss Europe’s post-World War II reorganization. The conference had lasting legal implications, shaping international law, the formation of the United Nations, and the division of Germany. More recently, on this day in 1997, a civil jury found O.J. Simpson liable for the wrongful deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, a stark contrast to his earlier criminal trial acquittal. This verdict highlighted the differing burdens of proof in civil versus criminal law. Each of these events reflects the evolving nature of law and governance, from the founding of the presidency to the expansion of judicial power and international legal agreements. President Donald Trump has announced plans to invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 as part of his strategy to deport millions of undocumented immigrants. The law, originally passed during rising tensions with France, gives the president broad authority to detain, deport, or impose restrictions on foreign nationals deemed a threat during wartime. It can be activated when the U.S. is at war or facing an “invasion or predatory incursion” by a foreign government. Trump has directed his administration to assess whether drug cartels operating in the U.S. qualify as an invasion, which could serve as the legal basis for invoking the act. Historically, the Alien Enemies Act has been used in wartime, including during the War of 1812 and both World Wars. President Woodrow Wilson imposed restrictions on foreign nationals, and President Franklin Roosevelt used the law to justify the internment of Japanese, German, and Italian Americans during World War II. The Supreme Court has upheld the law’s constitutionality, even allowing deportations after wartime, as seen in the 1948 case of a former Nazi, Kurt Ludecke. However, courts have been reluctant to define “invasion” broadly, previously ruling that large numbers of migrants crossing the border do not meet the founders' definition of an armed threat. Democratic lawmakers have recently pushed to repeal the act, citing its historical use in violating civil rights. If Trump proceeds with his plan, legal challenges will likely arise over whether cartel activity constitutes an invasion and whether the law can be used outside of traditional wartime contexts. What is the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 that Trump wants to use in deportations? | Reuters A Trump-appointed federal prosecutor, Edward Martin, has warned that anyone obstructing Elon Musk’s government efficiency initiative could face criminal charges. In a letter posted on X, Martin assured Musk that his office would take legal action against anyone threatening or hindering the work of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Musk responded with a public thank-you. The warning follows reports that career government officials tried to block DOGE employees from accessing sensitive information. At the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), two top security officials were removed after preventing DOGE representatives from entering secure areas. Similarly, a Treasury Department official reportedly resisted efforts by DOGE to access financial systems. Martin revealed that his office had been working with DOGE but did not provide specifics. He also encouraged Musk to report any “questionable conduct” for potential legal action. The Trump administration has been expanding its control over the Justice Department, recently launching an investigation into a sheriff’s office for releasing an undocumented immigrant in defiance of federal orders. Martin, who previously dropped all Jan. 6-related cases, has been outspoken in support of Trump, a departure from the typical neutrality of U.S. attorneys. US prosecutor warns of legal risk for anyone hindering Musk's efficiency effort | Reuters Lawyers representing plaintiffs in a $2.8 billion antitrust settlement with Blue Cross Blue Shield have asked a federal judge in Alabama to approve over $754 million in legal fees and expenses. The legal team, led by Joe Whatley and Edith Kallas, is requesting $657.1 million in fees—equal to 23.47% of the settlement fund—along with at least $97 million in expenses. They argue this percentage is consistent with a similar $2.7 billion Blue Cross settlement in 2020, which awarded lawyers a comparable fee. The case, which has been in litigation for over a decade, accuses Blue Cross of dividing the country into exclusive territories to avoid competition, which allegedly drove up insurance costs and lowered reimbursements. Blue Cross has denied any wrongdoing. The lawyers claim they have worked 373,000 hours and spent $100 million on expert witnesses and other expenses. A previous $2.7 billion settlement involving Blue Cross, which addressed overcharging claims, was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year and resulted in $667 million in legal fees. The current settlement agreement permits lawyers to request up to 25% of the total fund for legal fees, leaving the judge to decide whether the request is reasonable. Lawyers seek $754 million in new Blue Cross antitrust settlement | Reuters A U.S. judge has extended a pause on the Trump administration’s plan to freeze federal loans, grants, and financial aid after advocacy groups challenged the policy in court. Judge Loren AliKhan warned that cutting off funding would be "catastrophic" for organizations serving the public interest. The extension follows an earlier short-term pause, which was set to expire Monday. The funding freeze originated from a White House budget office memo directing agencies to halt funding in line with Trump’s executive orders on immigration, climate change, and diversity. The memo was later withdrawn, but some grant recipients reported ongoing difficulties accessing funds. A Rhode Island judge issued a separate restraining order last week in response to a lawsuit from 22 Democratic attorneys general and Washington, D.C. Despite these rulings, a Trump administration lawyer argued that the president has the right to direct agencies under his executive authority. The legal battle over whether the funding freeze can move forward remains unresolved. US judge extends pause on Trump's plan to freeze federal grants, loans | Reuters This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

    7min
  7. 3 DE FEV.

    Legal News for Mon 2/3 - Musk Makes a Mess of Treasury Payments, a New Conservative Law Firm Tied to Musk Launches, Google's App Store Appeal and McDonald's Settles a Scholarship Lawsuit

    This Day in Legal History: Chief Justice Taft Resigns On February 3, 1930, Chief Justice William Howard Taft resigned from the U.S. Supreme Court due to declining health. Taft remains the only person in American history to have served both as President (1909–1913) and as Chief Justice (1921–1930). After his presidency, he achieved what he considered his true ambition—leading the nation’s highest court. As Chief Justice, he was instrumental in modernizing the federal judiciary, including advocating for the construction of the Supreme Court’s own building, which was completed after his death. His tenure also saw decisions that reinforced executive power and judicial efficiency. By late 1929, however, his health had deteriorated significantly due to heart disease and progressive neurological issues. Struggling to fulfill his duties, he reluctantly stepped down, fearing he could no longer serve effectively. Just five weeks later, on March 8, 1930, he passed away. His successor, Charles Evans Hughes, was nominated by President Herbert Hoover. Taft’s dual legacy as both a U.S. President and Chief Justice remains unmatched in American history. Elon Musk claimed his "DOGE team," tasked with government efficiency, is shutting down certain payments to federal contractors, raising concerns about his access to U.S. Treasury systems. Musk stated that his team is eliminating corruption in real time, including halting payments to Lutheran Family Services, a charity supporting refugees. The Treasury Department has not confirmed Musk’s level of access, but Senator Ron Wyden suggested Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent granted DOGE full control over federal payments.  Musk's influence follows his appointment by Donald Trump to modernize federal IT, though he appears to be extending that role to financial oversight. USAID security officials were placed on leave after refusing DOGE staff access, prompting Musk to call the agency “a criminal organization.” His claims about widespread fraud in federal payments remain unverified, as Treasury already has systems in place to prevent improper transactions. Meanwhile, Treasury’s top career official, David Lebryk, recently left his post, further intensifying scrutiny. Trump praised Musk’s cost-cutting efforts but acknowledged potential disagreements on policy direction. Musk Says DOGE Is Halting Treasury Payments to US Contractors - Bloomberg A new conservative law firm, Lex Politica, has been launched by Chris Gober, a lawyer for Elon Musk’s America PAC, along with attorneys Steve Roberts and Jessica Furst Johnson. The firm aims to represent Republican candidates, campaigns, and causes, strengthening ties between conservative legal professionals and Trump-aligned politicians.  Gober, who previously served as America PAC’s treasurer, stated he wants Lex Politica to become synonymous with the conservative movement. Roberts and Johnson bring experience representing figures like House Speaker Mike Johnson, Senator Rick Scott, and former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy. The firm joins a growing network of right-leaning law groups, such as Dhillon Law Group and Schaerr Jaffe, which have close ties to Trump and Musk. These firms have been involved in significant legal battles, including free speech cases on Musk’s platform, X, and efforts to reshape the federal government’s legal structure. Neither Musk nor representatives for key Republican clients commented on the firm’s launch. Lawyers for Musk, Republican campaigns form new Washington firm | Reuters Google is appealing a jury verdict and court order that found it illegally stifled competition in its Play Store. The case, brought by Fortnite maker Epic Games in 2020, accused Google of monopolizing app distribution and in-app payments on Android devices. A jury ruled in Epic’s favor in 2023, and U.S. District Judge James Donato ordered Google to allow rival app stores within its Play Store and make its app catalog available to competitors. Google argues the ruling was flawed, claiming it competes with Apple’s App Store and that the judge improperly expanded the order to impact all developers, not just Epic. Epic insists Google engaged in years of anti-competitive behavior and is fighting to uphold the jury's decision. Microsoft, the U.S. Justice Department, and the FTC have backed Epic in the case. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is set to hear arguments on Monday, with a decision expected later this year, which could potentially be appealed to the Supreme Court. Google to ask US appeals court to overturn app store verdict | Reuters McDonald’s has agreed to revise its HACER National Scholarships Program by removing race and ethnicity as eligibility criteria to settle a lawsuit filed by the American Alliance for Equal Rights, a group led by affirmative action opponent Edward Blum. The lawsuit argued that restricting eligibility to students with at least one Hispanic or Latino parent discriminated against other ethnic groups. McDonald’s denied wrongdoing but decided that modifying the program was the best course of action. Moving forward, applicants will need to demonstrate their contributions to the Hispanic and Latino community rather than meet racial or ethnic requirements. The settlement comes as McDonald’s and other companies scale back diversity initiatives following legal challenges and political pressure. In January, McDonald’s also abandoned diversity goals for corporate leadership, citing shifting legal standards, including the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling that struck down race-based college admissions policies. Blum criticized the scholarship’s previous criteria, arguing that many students were unfairly excluded. McDonald's settles lawsuit challenging Latino scholarship program | Reuters This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

    6min
  8. 31 DE JAN.

    Legal News for Fri 1/31 - Fox Rothschild Blocks Deepseek, A Court Ruling Allowing Handgun Sales to those under 21, Trump FCC Telecom Rollback and DEI Lawsuit at Chicago Bally's

    This Day in Legal History: 13th Amendment Passed On January 31, 1865, the U.S. Congress passed the 13th Amendment, formally abolishing slavery in the United States. The amendment declared that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." While President Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation had freed enslaved people in Confederate-held territories two years earlier, it lacked the permanence of a constitutional amendment.  The House of Representatives passed the measure by a vote of 119 to 56, narrowly reaching the required two-thirds majority after intense political maneuvering. The Senate had already approved it in April 1864. Ratification by the states followed, culminating in its adoption on December 6, 1865. The amendment marked a legal end to slavery, but systemic racial discrimination persisted through Black Codes, Jim Crow laws, and other restrictive measures. Despite this, the 13th Amendment laid the foundation for future civil rights advancements. Its passage was a key victory for abolitionists and a defining moment of the Civil War’s aftermath. The amendment’s "punishment for crime" clause later became a subject of controversy, as it allowed convict leasing and forced labor in prisons, disproportionately affecting Black Americans. Even today, debates continue over its implications for the U.S. prison system. Fox Rothschild LLP has blocked its lawyers from using DeepSeek, a Chinese AI startup, due to concerns about client data security. While the firm allows AI tools like ChatGPT with restrictions, DeepSeek's data storage in China raises unique risks, according to Mark G. McCreary, the firm’s chief AI and information security officer. A recent data breach involving DeepSeek further heightened security concerns. Other major law firms, including Wilson Sonsini and Polsinelli, are also implementing strict vetting processes for new AI models. Wilson Sonsini requires its chief information security officer and general counsel to approve AI tools before use, while Polsinelli enforces firm-wide restrictions on unapproved AI software. Law firms are also monitoring AI use by third-party vendors to ensure compliance with security protocols. McCreary emphasized that established legal tech companies prioritize data protection, reducing the risk of firms switching to less secure AI models. Fox Rothschild Blocks DeepSeek's AI Model for Attorney Use A federal appeals court has ruled that the U.S. government's ban on licensed firearms dealers selling handguns to adults under 21 is unconstitutional. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a previous ruling, citing the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which requires modern gun laws to align with historical firearm regulations. The federal ban, enacted in 1968, was challenged by young adults and gun rights groups, who argued it violated the Second Amendment. Judge Edith Jones, writing for the court, found insufficient historical evidence to justify restricting gun sales for 18-to-20-year-olds. The ruling marks a major shift in gun policy, aligning with broader legal trends expanding Second Amendment protections. The Justice Department, which defended the ban under the Biden administration, has not yet commented on the decision. Gun rights advocates hailed the ruling as a victory against age-based firearm restrictions. US ban on gun sales to adults under age 21 is unconstitutional, court rules | Reuters In a piece for Techdirt, Karl Bode critiques the Trump FCC’s decision to roll back efforts to curb exclusive broadband deals between landlords and internet providers. The Biden FCC had attempted to update outdated rules that allowed ISPs to form monopolies within apartment buildings, driving up prices and reducing competition. However, due to delays caused by industry opposition and the failed nomination of reformer Gigi Sohn, key proposals—including a ban on bulk billing—were left unapproved. When Brendan Carr took over as FCC chair under Trump, he quickly scrapped these pending consumer protections. Bode argues that U.S. telecom policy is stuck in a cycle where Democrats make half-hearted attempts at reform, only for Republicans to dismantle them entirely under the guise of deregulation. The result is a landscape where telecom giants and landlords continue to collude, leaving consumers with fewer choices, higher costs, and poor service. The Trump FCC Makes It Easier For Your Landlord And Your ISP To Collude To Rip You Off | Techdirt Bally’s Chicago casino project is facing a legal challenge over its commitment to reserving 25% of its investment opportunities for women and people of color. Conservative activist Edward Blum, known for spearheading lawsuits against affirmative action, filed the suit on behalf of two white men who claim they were unfairly excluded from investing. The lawsuit argues that the policy violates federal civil rights law and should be open to all investors regardless of race. This case is part of a broader push against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, which gained momentum after a recent executive order from President Trump eliminating DEI programs in the federal government. Bally’s maintains that its agreement with the city complies with legal requirements. The lawsuit references an 1866 civil rights law originally meant to protect Black Americans' economic rights and is similar to other cases challenging race-conscious corporate policies. Blum’s organization has previously led legal battles against diversity-focused scholarships, grants, and hiring programs, including the Supreme Court case that struck down race-based college admissions in 2023. America’s Battle Over DEI Strikes a Chicago Casino’s Financing Plan This week’s closing theme is by Franz Schubert. Franz Schubert, one of the most beloved composers of the early Romantic era, was born on this day in 1797 in Vienna, Austria. Though he lived only 31 years, his vast output of music—ranging from symphonies and chamber works to piano music and over 600 songs—continues to inspire musicians and audiences alike. Schubert's music is often characterized by its lyricism, rich harmonies, and deep emotional expression, seamlessly bridging the clarity of the Classical era with the passion of Romanticism. Despite his immense talent, Schubert struggled with financial stability and never achieved widespread fame during his lifetime. He spent much of his career composing in relative obscurity, supported by a close-knit circle of friends and fellow artists. His songs, or lieder, are especially celebrated for their ability to capture both the beauty and melancholy of the human experience, with works like Erlkönig and Winterreise standing as some of the greatest achievements in the genre. His instrumental music, however, remained underappreciated until long after his death. Today, his symphonies, string quartets, and piano sonatas are recognized as masterpieces, filled with lyrical beauty and striking contrasts. Among his later works, the Piano Sonata No. 20 in A major, D. 959 showcases his mature style, blending elegance with deep introspection. The final movement, Rondo: Allegretto, serves as this week's closing theme, capturing both Schubert's charm and his poignant sense of longing. Though he died in 1828, just a year after Beethoven, Schubert’s influence only grew in the decades that followed. Composers like Schumann, Brahms, and even Mahler admired his work, helping to cement his legacy as one of music’s great geniuses. Today, on the anniversary of his birth, we celebrate the life and music of a composer who, despite facing struggles and setbacks, left behind an extraordinary body of work that continues to resonate across centuries. Without further ado, Franz Schubert’s Piano Sonata No. 20 in A major, D. 959.  This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

    20min

Classificações e avaliações

4,7
de 5
9 avaliações

Sobre

The idea is that this podcast can accompany you on your commute home and will render you minimally competent on the major legal news stories of the day. The transcript is available in the form of a newsletter at www.minimumcomp.com. www.minimumcomp.com

Você também pode gostar de

Para ouvir episódios explícitos, inicie sessão.

Fique por dentro deste podcast

Inicie sessão ou crie uma conta para seguir podcasts, salvar episódios e receber as atualizações mais recentes.

Selecionar um país ou região

África, Oriente Médio e Índia

Ásia‑Pacífico

Europa

América Latina e Caribe

Estados Unidos e Canadá