50 episodes

Subscribe here for the family of Speakeasy Ideas podcasts, which includes Speakeasy Today and Speakeasy History with Dr. Thomas L. Krannawitter as well as The Law with D.K. Williams.

Speakeasy Ideas Speakeasy Ideas

    • Education
    • 4.7 • 15 Ratings

Subscribe here for the family of Speakeasy Ideas podcasts, which includes Speakeasy Today and Speakeasy History with Dr. Thomas L. Krannawitter as well as The Law with D.K. Williams.

    The Law episode 83: Presser v. Illinois

    The Law episode 83: Presser v. Illinois

    In a U.S. Supreme Court opinion written between the passage of the 14th Amendment and when the Court started “incorporating” the Bill of Rights against the states, the Court upheld the conviction and $10 fine against Herman Presser. Presser had led a group of about 400 armed people calling themselves Lehr und Wehr Verein (The Teaching and Defense Association), a pro-labor socialist group, in a parade through Chicago. In what must have quite the spectacle, Presser led the parade on a horse and carried a cavalry sword. Such armed parades were against Illinois law. Sometimes this case is cited, erroneously, by gun control advocates. Find out why.

    LINKS

    The case itself: Presser v. Illinois (1886)

    Dave Kopel on Presser v. Illinois

    The Law with D.K. Williams Facebook page

    Follow The Law with D.K. Williams on Twitter @TheLawDKW

     

    • 25 min
    The Law episode 82: Jacobson v. Massachusetts

    The Law episode 82: Jacobson v. Massachusetts

    What is the extent of government authority to “protect” the common good during a public health crisis? Earlier this year, the United States Supreme Court denied a California church’s request to stop the enforcement of certain public health rules that negatively affected the way the church conducted religious services. In doing so, the Court relied upon the 115 year old Jacobson case that upheld a mandatory smallpox vaccination. The language used by the Court in Jacobson is frightening: “The possession and enjoyment of all rights are subject to such reasonable conditions as may be deemed by the governing authority of the country essential to the safety, health, peace, good order, and morals of the community.” We discuss where that standard leads.

    LINKS

    The case itself: Jacobson v Massachusetts (1905)

    South Bay United Pentecostal Church v Newsom (2020) – Request for injunctive relief denied.

    South Bay United Pentecostal Church of Chula Vista, CA, official site.

    The Law with D.K. Williams Facebook page

    Follow The Law with D.K. Williams on Twitter @TheLawDKW

    • 36 min
    The Law episode 81: Bostock v. Clayton County

    The Law episode 81: Bostock v. Clayton County

    Earlier this year, the Supreme Court of the United States — in a 6-3 decision in the case of Bostock v. Clayton County — held that homosexual and transgender people are protected from employment discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Act prohibits discrimination against anyone “because of sex.” Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, concluded that firing someone due to their homosexuality or transgender status is prohibited by that language. The Court discusses statutory interpretation and how, even if Congress did not contemplate a particular outcome, the words they choose when writing a statue, matter. We discuss how statutes often have consequences unintended by Congress. We also discuss an important question ignored by the Court: Does Congress have the legitimate constitutional authority to regulate the private, intrastate activity of individuals?

    LINKS

    The case itself: Bostock v. Clayton County (2020)

    The Law with D.K. Williams Facebook page

    Follow The Law with D.K. Williams on Twitter @TheLawDKW

    • 28 min
    The Law episode 80: Chiafalo v. Washington

    The Law episode 80: Chiafalo v. Washington

    In the conclusion to the rogue elector saga we have been following, the Supreme Court applied what I refer to as the “Erosion Doctrine” to unanimously hold that states can turn their presidential electors into mere rubber stamps, thus depriving them of any discretion when selecting the president. Over two centuries, the power of electors to use their discretion slowly eroded until this case, decided earlier this year, officially killing off that discretion and an original part of the Constitution with it. We discuss it.

    LINKS

    The case itself: Chiafalo v. Washington (2020)

    The Law with D.K. Williams Facebook page

    Follow The Law with D.K. Williams on Twitter @TheLawDKW

    • 35 min
    The Law episode 79: Ramos v. Louisiana

    The Law episode 79: Ramos v. Louisiana

    Earlier this year, in the case of Ramos v. Louisiana, SCOTUS overturned precedent by a 6-3 margin and held that states cannot convict someone of a criminal offense unless the jury verdict is unanimous.

    Evangelisto Ramos had been convicted by a 10-2 verdict and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole in Louisiana. Ramos was granted a new trial by this decision. That seems simple enough.

    The real issue, however, was the deeper question of just how important precedents are, and when incorrectly decided precedents should be overturned. The subtext of that issue is all about a future possible challenge to Roe v. Wade.

    LINKS

    The case itself: Ramos v. Louisiana (2020)

    The Law with D.K. Williams Facebook page

    Follow The Law with D.K. Williams on Twitter @TheLawDKW

    • 35 min
    The Law episode 78: RNC v. DNC

    The Law episode 78: RNC v. DNC

    Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a controversial 5-4 decision, overruled a lower court order expanding Wisconsin statutory deadlines for submitting mail-in ballots due to the state government’s response to the Coronavirus. The five justice majority were all appointed by Republican presidents. The four justice minority were all appointed by Democratic presidents. Was this a strictly partisan outcome? We discuss it.

    LINKS

    The case itself: Republican National Committee v Democratic National Committee (2020)

    The Verdict blog article referenced in the podcast: Why did the U.S. Supreme Court Endanger the Lives of Wisconsin Voters?

    Like The Law with D.K. Williams Facebook page

    Follow The Law with D.K. Williams on Twitter @TheLawDKW 

    • 24 min

Customer Reviews

4.7 out of 5
15 Ratings

15 Ratings

Rick Turnquist ,

Well Worth The Listen

Dr. Tom Krannawitter is one of the most knowledgeable, engaging speakers of our time. His in-depth knowledge of the facts and principles of the American founding are prodigious, and his delivery of these facts are so much fun to listen to. Tom also takes current events and discusses them in light of the founding principles. These podcasts are well worth listening to.

JamAlJeff ,

Every American Should Listen

The ideas discussed by Dr. Krannawitter and Speakeasy Ideas are, to our collective detriment, not taught in our public schools. It’s important to hear and consider these teachings before drawing conclusions about the US founding and our unique human heritage.

Kk bear ,

Great Podcast

If you enjoy the beautiful ideas of human freedom then listen to Dr. Krannawitter unpack them. These podcasts cover big ideas however they are displayed brilliantly in a contemporary context that leads to a pleasurable listening experience.

This is a must subscription for all!

Top Podcasts In Education

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson
Motiversity
TED
Daily Stoic
Slate Podcasts
Lauryn Evarts & Michael Bosstick / Dear Media