13 MAR 2023 · Today's guest, renowned civil liberties attorney and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, raises the bar and exceeds the highest standards. Professor Dershowitz has published over a thousand articles and 50 books, including several national bestsellers. His autobiography https://www.amazon.com/Taking-Stand-My-Life-Law/dp/0307719278 was a New York Times bestseller. Other notable books include https://www.amazon.com/Trials-Zion-Alan-M-Dershowitz/dp/0446576735, https://www.amazon.com/Rights-Wrongs-Origins-Experience-Injustice/dp/B0009K76B2, https://www.amazon.com/Case-Israel-Alan-Dershowitz/dp/0471679526, and https://www.amazon.com/Chutzpah-Alan-M-Dershowitz/dp/0671760890. His forthcoming book https://www.amazon.com/Dershowitz-Killing-Decides-Shall-Live-ebook/dp/B0B88V758Q/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= examines the complex issue of determining rules regarding life and death decisions. Following the principles that have guided his long, distinguished career, he argues these rules should reflect the irreversibility of death. In this episode, Dershowitz explains how he became unfairly "canceled" for adhering to his principles, and what upholding these principles has cost him. His most recent book, https://www.amazon.com/Price-Principle-Integrity-Worth-Consequences/dp/1510773282/ref=asc_df_1510773282/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=598289157286&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=4118730717713567818&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9032001&hvtargid=pla-1650964876442&psc=1 (July 2022), takes a broad stance against the dangerous trend of cancellations—both of specific people as well as the very idea of neutral justice. It’s not only right-wingers provocateurs being cancelled on college campuses anymore. Liberal ideas, including some of the most cherished principles of American government, are now being cast aside. Take the presumption of innocence. It’s the bedrock of our adversarial legal system. We all pay lip service to the idea that everyone is entitled to a vigorous defense. Yet the principle seems to go out the window whenever the person being defended is unpopular, as when Dershowitz pointed out the shaky legal grounds for impeaching former President Trump. In recent years, Dershowitz himself has suffered the ‘price of principle’ as the latest victim of cancel culture. Former friends like Larry David refuse to talk to him; he’s been shunned from events at which he used to be top-billed speaker. And his principled defenses of unpopular figures like Trump have been used against him in the court of public opinion. Unlike most celebrities whom the “cancelists” go after, Alan was https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/in-victory-for-dershowitz-epstein-victim-says-i-may-have-made-a-mistake-in-accusing-him/. Still, Dershowitz has found few defenders. He has had to defend himself. Furthermore, he writes that principles have taken a backseat to partisan identity politics. Partisan Democrats forget that his defense of Trump was based on the same principles he had used to defend Clinton against partisan attacks. He argues that too many people abandon their principles in favor of whatever stance benefits their political party or social group, and believes we are heading towards a "dystopia of partisanship and discrimination" if this trend continues.

6 MAR 2023 · Californians enjoy abundant choice when it comes to cuisine, entertainment and leisure activities. Yet in the political arena, we are stuck with just one choice. The Democrats have effectively had One Party Rule here for the last two decades. Since 1996, Democrats have continuously held a majority in the State Assembly and currently hold a dominant 62-18 supermajority in the 80-seat chamber. Most forget what happened in the 1990s that permanently changed the balance of power. In 1994, Proposition 187 passed by referendum, with strong support from then-Governor Pete Wilson. The law banned undocumented immigrants from accessing non-emergency healthcare, public schools, and other services in California. Since then, Hispanic voters have largely voted as a bloc for Democrats, leaving Republicans all but irrelevant. Tom Campbell served five terms in the US Congress, and one two-year term in the State Senate. He created the Common Sense Party to combine fiscal responsibility with inclusivity to appeal to the wide swath of voters who want more choice in their political candidates. Sounds a lot like libertarianism, without all the baggage that the word carries. Is it too much to ask for an independent-minded politician who is neither bought and paid for by the public sector unions, nor an anti-immigrant fanatic? The California Common Sense Party has aligned with Andrew Yang’s “Forward” Party movement – trying to break the “two-party doom loop,” and find common sense solutions. Tom Campbell joins me this Sunday to break the latest news about their plans to disrupt California politics.

27 FEB 2023 · Back in early 2021, Cato Institute senior fellow Ted Galen Carpenter urged Washington "to abandon its efforts to torpedo Nord Stream 2." His warnings have been proven prescient by Seymour Hersh's recent revelations, which seem to confirm the US government's involvement in the destruction of the pipeline. Many journalists admit behind closed doors that they believe in the US's involvement, yet the media remains silent out of fear of provoking a response from Russia. In his new book Unreliable Watchdog, Ted Galen Carpenter argues that the news media has become a tool for propaganda rather than a watchdog for the American people, leading to a distorted view of U.S. foreign policy and a “garrison state” mentality. He examines the media's willingness to accept official accounts and policy justifications without skepticism, particularly in regards to the Vietnam War, Persian Gulf War, the Balkans, Iraq War, Libya and Syria civil wars, and post–Cold War relations with Russia and China. He questions why journalists and social media platforms collaborate with government officials in pushing an activist foreign policy, even when results are questionable or disastrous. Are we repeating the same mistakes with Ukraine as the media cheerleads the escalation of another unwinnable war?

22 FEB 2023 · George Will calls it the year's "most-needed book on public affairs"—Philip K. Howard's Not Accountable tackles public sector unions head-on, arguing that they're not only dangerous, but unconstitutional. Not Accountable is a non-partisan vision for fixing the biggest flaw in government. Consider a few data points: Public sector membership in the United States is around 7 million. 4.6 million teachers. 1.3 million service employees. California, with 300,000 teachers, is only able to terminate two or three per year for poor performance. 40,000 Californian retirees receive over $100,000 in pension salary. In the end, who pays? Our children do—both in lost learning outcomes, future taxes, and less money in state and federal budgets for other services. Howard, the founder of the Common Good organization, joins me Sunday to make the case for a legal solution – not a democratic one – for fixing the broken system. Progressives, libertarians, and conservatives alike should be up in arms about the lack of accountability for police officers, teachers, and all those who are supposed to serve the public good. What can we do about it? Find out this Sunday on the show of ideas.

13 FEB 2023 · Images of illegal crossings are disturbingly chaotic and make it clear that there is indeed an immigration crisis. People perceive that chaos means we need government to exercise even more control, even when government is to blame for the chaos (as in the case of immigration). And so we get the vicious cycle that ends with our broken immigration system. https://twitter.com/AlexNowrasteh, the director of economic and social policy studies at the Cato Institute, returns to the show Sunday to lay out pragmatic solutions for alleviating the chaos at the border.It starts with simplifying the system, and allowing more opportunities for immigrants to live and work here legally. Alex is the director of economic and social policy studies. His popular publications have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, the Washington Post, and most other major publications in the United States.He is the coauthor (with Benjamin Powell) of the book https://www.amazon.com/Wretched-Refuse-Political-Immigration-Institutions/dp/1108702457/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=wretched+refuse&qid=1606232679&sr=8-1 (Cambridge University Press, 2020), which is the first book on how economic institutions in receiving countries adjust to immigration. He is also the coauthor (with Mark S. Krikorian) of the booklet https://www.amazon.com/Open-Immigration-Yea-Encounter-Broadsides/dp/159403821X?tag=catoinstitute-20 (Encounter Broadsides, 2014) and has contributed numerous book chapters about immigration to various edited volumes.Our own immigration series https://bobzadek.substack.com/p/let-them-all-in has answered 5 of the main populist objections to open immigration. The series will conclude with an essay on policy solutions - the topic for our show this week.

5 FEB 2023 · People, and families in particular, are fleeing California in droves. Last year, the population shrank for the second year in a row, in large part because of the lack of new housing and exorbitant prices of the dwindling existing stock. Politicians love to talk about “affordable housing,” but the plans to allow more development go out the window as soon as their talking points are pitted against the agendas of powerful lobbying groups. The infamous NIMBY’s of California have found allies in unions, who have together weaponized an environmental “super-statute” that effectively blocks any new construction if it can be shown to increase carbon emissions. https://twitter.com/christianbrits?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor is an associate editor at https://reason.com/ who has written extensively about housing policy. His work shines a light on the root causes of the housing crisis, and why the patchwork of solutions coming from California’s legislative houses has failed to significantly ameliorate the problem. Christian will join the show of ideas to explain how the California Environmental Quality Act makes the approval of new housing nearly impossible.What will it take to break through the thicket of regulations when the most powerful lobbies have an interest in keeping them in place?

31 JAN 2023 · Everyone knows that special interests lobby government for favors. The Twitter Files have revealed that lobbying is a two-way street, with government lobbying corporations too – often to silence critics of its policies. Will Duffield of the Cato Institute has become the go-to expert on so-called “Jawboning” i.e., informally pressuring private companies to censor disfavored speech. The Jawboning-industrial-complex includes members of both parties. Major social media companies now have internal teams to handle “suggestions” from government officials. Ban this person. Silence that opinion. It’s not exactly what Orwell pictured, but it’s still concerning. I previously interviewed Jenin Younes of the National Civil Liberties Alliance on a related topic. NCLA has defended those who censored for contradicting official CDC stances on COVID, like Martin Kulldorff and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. Getting banned from a private social media platform isn’t the same as getting thrown in jail for speech. But what if the social media company is acting under implicit pressure from Congress? It’s a classic “Your Money or Your Life!” decision. Does this kind of censorship violate the Constitution, even if no laws are passed? Duffield joins me Sunday to discuss the nuances of free speech law in the social media era, and to lay out a libertarian vision of digital expression.

23 JAN 2023 · Just when you think you’ve seen it all, the FBI goes and does something so egregious that it shocks even long-time Institute for Justice attorneys.If you’ve been following the issue of civil asset forfeiture, you may remember the case of Timbs v. Indiana*, in which the Supreme Court unanimously overturned a decision by Indiana’s state Supreme Court, finding that the state’s seizure of a $42,000 Land Rover violated the 8th amendment’s “excessive fines and fees” clause.Law enforcement departments across the country have been colluding with federal law enforcement to effectively “police for profit,” with civil asset forfeiture being their primary tool. Under this practice, a person need not be found guilty for their property to be taken. Tyson Timbs, the defendant in that case, had the help of the IJ to fight through the long legal battle that he ultimately won. Many innocent victims of forfeiture laws simply throw up their hands and accept defeat.Mike Greenberg is an attorney at the Institute for Justice who will join me Sunday (1/22) to discuss a new case in which the FBI blatantly violated the terms of their warrant in seizing over $80 million in assets from the private vaults kept by a safe deposit company. A majority of the assets and precious family heirlooms have now been restored to their rightful owners – but only after a fight.Greenberg was part of the IJ’s legal team that fought on behalf of Paul and Jennifer Snitko, whose belongings were wrongly seized and photographed by FBI agents in March of 2021 without probable cause. Doesn’t the Constitution say something about that?“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. “ – The Fourth Amendment to the ConstitutionSeems pretty clear cut to me. Greenberg and I will discuss the facts of the case before delivering a verdict.What will the consequences be for the FBI this time?

15 JAN 2023 · The word sustainability is rather slippery. We’re told that our current energy consumption is “unsustainable,” and are thus cajoled into spending billions on Green New Deal type legislation by politicians and celebrities who criss-cross the country on jumbo jets. Even allegedly “clean” energy alternatives to goal and gas require material resources that often dwarf the emissions they’re supposed to offset. It’s not enough to just stop burning oil—sustainability proponents have to propose something to replace it. Point this inconvenient truth out, and you’ll likely hear the retort that a least the projects create jobs in the Green Economy.https://twitter.com/mungowitz, has another name for the typical thinking behind sustainability: sophistry. https://www.aier.org/article/green-energy-is-the-modern-broken-window/ quotes Frederic Bastiat’s “Economic Sophisms” at length to make the critical point that costs are not benefits. Destroying wealth in order to create jobs is a losing proposition. Munger, a modern-day Bastiat, skewers today’s environmentalist sophists just by showing the logical conclusion of their preferred policies: “Burn all the gas-powered cars? Jobs! Tear down all the oil and gas-powered power plants, so we have shortages of electricity? So many jobs!” Munger returns to the show this Sunday to explore the seen vs. the unseen in green energy and sustainability. We’ll focus on one of my personal bugaboos—recycling—and Mike will explain why it’s typically worse for the environment than just throwing stuff away.Finally, we’ll revisit Mike’s clear-eyed defense of capitalism, https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07VZ8ZP11/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1The question of sustainability boils down to this: how can we best fulfill the needs of the current generations without compromising the needs of future generations? We can talk all day about alternative energy, but Munger notes that there is no to alternative capitalism. Only the market can solve our sustainability woes.

8 JAN 2023 · Ashley Varner of the Freedom Foundation on the financial boon to the Democrats; Looking around today, do we see evidence that the government fears the people? Why should they?Remember when Lois Lerner targeted Tea Party freedom activists as head of the IRS? She retired with a full pension and never bore any consequences for weaponizing the agency she led against ideological opponents.More recently, the Biden administration was fearless enough to pass the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act,” which included a provision for hiring 87,000 new IRS agents. To quote Jefferson again, in his complaints against the Crown, “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.”They say the new agents will “mostly provide customer service,” and that we need to spend $80 billion in order to raise $200 billion in new revenue. Does anyone believe those claims?But there is another sinister feature of the move to bolster the most reviled of all bureaucracies. The IRS represents the single largest federal public sector union lobby, and 100% of its political contributions go to one party (guess which). Ashley Varner of the Freedom Foundation joins me this Sunday to discuss the perverse nature of public sector employee unions, which can lobby the government for direct pay raises – all at taxpayer expense. Varner will explain how the vicious cycle of political privilege is perpetuated by public sector unions and their boosters in government.The Freedom Foundation is a “Do Tank” based in Washington State that is leading a national movement of workers who are opting out of their union dues.We’ll also discuss the unresolved IRS scandal of 2013, and the broader problem of public sector union influence – including the teachers union and their figurehead, Randi Weingarten. Finally, I’ll talk about what the founders would have said about our current tax system, especially the Income Tax.