Good afternoon. Welcome to Integrating Doctrine and Diversity Speaker Series, Integrating Content on American Indian Law and Indigenous Identities. My name is Anna Baraza. I am the Director of Diversity and Outreach for the Roger Williams University School of Law. I'm going to read our land and labor acknowledgement. Before we begin, I wanna take a moment to reflect on the lands on which we reside. We are coming from many places physically and remotely and we wanna acknowledge the ancestral homelands and traditional territories of Indigenous and Native peoples who have been here since time immemorial and to recognize that we must continue to build our solidarity and kinship with Native peoples across the Americas and across the globe. Roger Williams University School of Law is located here in Bristol, Rhode Island. And so we acknowledge and honor the Narragansett and Poconocket people and Sawams, the original name of the land that our campus resides on. We also acknowledge that this country would not exist if it wasn't for the free enslaved labor of Black people. And we recognize that the town of Bristol and the very land our campus resides on have benefited significantly from the trade of enslaved people from Africa. The economy of New England, Rhode Island and more specifically Bristol was built from wealth generated through the triangle trade of human lives. During this time of national reckoning with our history of slavery and the disparate treatment of Black people we honor the legacy of the African diaspora and the Black lives, knowledge and skills stolen due to violence and white supremacy. While the movement for justice and liberation is building and we are witnessing the power of the people many are still being met with violence and even being killed. As upholders of justice our hope is to become agents of change for members of our society who have been met with violence physical, mental, emotional, through our privilege. And as upholders of justice we believe that our students who soon will be practitioners of law can be and already are agents of change as well. And for those who are not familiar with this practice why do we do a land and labor acknowledgement? I wanna share with you a statement from Northwestern University's Native American and indigenous initiatives which explains it much better than I could. It is important to understand the longstanding history that has brought you to reside on the land and to seek to understand your place within that history. Land acknowledgements and labor acknowledgements do not exist in a past tense or historical context. Colonialism is a current ongoing process and we need to build our mindfulness of our present participation. Thank you very much. I introduced to you Nicole Dyshlewski who will be our host for the afternoon. Thanks Anna. Hi everybody. Welcome to Integrating Doctor and Diversity Speaker Series. This is our second event in our second year of holding these sessions and I am very excited about today's speaker. Today's speakers. Today's event integrating content on American Indian law and indigenous identities features three experts, Matthew, Monty and Rebecca. I feel really honored to speak with the three of you today and want to dive right in. Thank you for taking the time to share your insights with us. I'm going to start with our first panelist, Matthew Fletcher. Matthew is the Harry Burns Hutchins Collegiate Professor of Law at Michigan Law. He teaches and writes in the areas of federal Indian law, American tribal law, Anishinaabe legal and political philosophy, constitutional law, federal courts and legal ethics. He was the lead reporter for the American Law Institute's Restatement of Law of American Indians, completed in 2022 and is the primary editor and author of the leading law blog on American Indian law and policy, Turtle Talk. Matthew is also an author of an essay in our forthcoming follow-up book, Integrating Doctor and Diversity Beyond the First Year. To start us off, I want to point out that so many members of our audience and colleagues beyond our session today are working to integrate diverse content and perspectives into their classes. And the questions I get from the legal education community often come more from a fear or for their being afraid of their own lack of knowledge, then they do from a place of unwillingness to integrate this content. With that stated, my first question is a very basic one, but is one that I have gotten the most often in this area of law. Matthew, can you address how professors should most respectfully be referring to the topic of Indian law and the tribal people involved in the disputes? Should professors be calling this Indian law or is that an antiquated term? Should we be referring to tribe members as indigenous peoples, native peoples? Should we be referring to them by their tribal affiliation? Can you just start us off with some of the best practices in this regard? Yeah, I'll try. I think it's very much how comfortable the professor feels and who the audience is. So Indian, the word Indian, of course, is completely incorrect in every way. This is not India. People in this continent are not Indians, so to speak, but it is what we say and what we do. The classes are typically called federal Indian law, American Indian law, something to that effect. The constitution uses the phrase and the phrase Indian tribes and the term Indians not taxed. Two thirds, I would guess, maybe three quarters of all the statutes pass in Indian fares, use the word Indian. It's just that if you're gonna teach the class, you gotta use the word. It's fair to hedge and say, hey, this is not a correct term. But it's also fair to say, we're gonna use this term and we're gonna use it. We're gonna use it reasonably. It has sort of been recovered by Indian people, going all the way back to the American Indian movement, which took it very seriously to use intentionally and use that term. So it's fine. You probably can't get away with that in Canada. That is not a word that is acceptable in Canada, but in the United States, in most audiences, you'll be just fine. But I won't have to even explain yourself. People in the United States who are native tend to identify themselves as their tribal affiliation. And they'll do that themselves. And when you do a land acknowledgement like you just did, that helps a great deal. So it's totally fine to use the word Indian, totally fine to focus on the tribal affiliation of people. And it's also, let's be frank, when you have the question, should we use Indian? Who are you? What are you doing? It's usually, not usually, it's to me, often. And unfortunately too often is an effort to put people in their place to say, hey, who are you exactly? And so to sort of recast and associate and reinforce the racial hierarchies that we have in this country. So use the word. It shouldn't be a problem, but just understand and know what you need to know in order to use it effectively and in the right way. Thanks, Matthew. It seems kind of strange to me to be asking such a fundamental question to such respected legal scholars. But like I said, in my experience, people shy away from integrating diverse content and diverse voices because they don't feel like they have the knowledge or skills to do the material justice and to approach the topics with proper respect. And so I want people to hear, hey, you might be hesitant to do this and it might sound wrong, but you need to go and do it anyway. I spent today watching YouTube videos. So I could correctly pronounce things. And if I get them wrong, I hope someone corrects me. My hope is that hearing the answers to these questions from such distinguished legal scholars will help professors have a bit more confidence in themselves while they're doing the work. My next question is for Monty. Monty Mills joined the University of Washington School of Law Faculty in 2022 as the Charles Eyestone Professor of Law and the Director of the Native American Law Center. He teaches American Indian law property and other classes focused on Native American and natural resources related topics. Monty also co-authored an essay in our first integrating doctrine and diversity book. Monty, in that essay, you and your co-authors stated, our professional obligations as lawyers demand that we disrupt and end racism. Unfortunately, our approach to developing the professional identity of law students overlooks the racism endemic in the law, legal system, profession, and legal education. While students may take electives in critical race theory or intern in clinics that take racism head-on, law schools generally do not require them to wrestle with how the legal system created and perpetuates racism, nor do they develop the values and skills necessary to respond effectively to and ultimately dismantle it. The essay was written well before the changes to ABA Standard 303 were adopted. And now all law schools are to some extent wrestling with this very issue. Can you please share some of your perspectives on how to take racism head-on, teach law effectively, integrate Indian law topics and help students develop their professional identities all at the same time? Based on your experiences, are you able to share some specific strategies or thoughts about how to do this within the context of a class which is not specifically on federal Indian law? Sure, I'll offer some thoughts, certainly not any magic bullets or entire solutions. And I think that's an important starting point is that it's about the work and the process and continuing to educate and get better at it. It's impossible I think to ever arrive at the perfect approach to any of this stuff which is part of what makes the challenge so great. I do want to say just thank you for having me on this panel and I particularly appreciated the acknowledgement of land and labor and particularly the recognition of the continuing potential and impacts of colonialism. And I think that's really where we could think about how to integrate these topics into other courses. And for me at least the starting point is recognizing that we're all doing this already. We're all helping develop the professional identity of our students. We are all addressing race and racism in our courses. We are all working toward preparing our students for the practice of law. The question is whether we're doing it with an explicit focus on anti-racism and approaching it in a particularly open and intentional way, or whether as I think the historical and traditional practices of much of our profession in academia has been we're ignoring or excusing a lot of those aspects of the work that we do. And so I would say first and foremost, a step that anybody can take is just recognizing we're all doing this already. And the question is the extent to which we do so with an acknowledgement of the broader context and history and really practices of our profession that for the most part haven't really changed. Particularly since the late 1800s, but even before that. So I think that's a pretty low bar for everybody to sort of think a little bit more deeply about what is explicitly delivered in the curriculum, but maybe more importantly, what's implicitly delivered in the curriculum and what messages we're sending our students. And I'd say that's true with regard to incorporating Indian law topics as well. I like to say that the true test is not whether Indian law can be incorporated into the broader law school curriculum, but whether the broader law school curriculum can be incorporated into Indian law because there really, you mentioned how do you do this? And of course it's not specifically about Indian law. Well, arguably the only reason of course isn't specifically about Indian laws, those parts of that area of the law just aren't being considered or presented. And part of that is the canon and part of that is the research and the textbooks. And I think fortunately, as Matthew, a number of other scholars are beginning to point out that is just leaving out a whole nother part of the story of our legal system and true American law in a lot of ways. And so particularly for folks who are teaching in areas where it may not be explicit, the connection or the relevance or the importance of Indian law or tribal law along those areas, there are ways, even within a specific legal area to explore those overlaps in those connections. And if you're familiar with contract law or you're familiar with secure transactions or you're familiar with intellectual property, you can find ways in which those areas of the law connect up with both federal Indian law and maybe more importantly and maybe more powerfully tribal law. And that's an easier avenue potentially than to get into seeing other ways in which these other governments and the American legal system has addressed questions of indigenous rights and Indian law more broadly. So I'd say start there and just start with the recognition that whatever choices you make in your curriculum you're doing something about these questions and it's just what you wanna do with it and recognizing, last thing I'll say, acknowledging you may not be an expert in federal Indian law or tribal law, that's okay. I think there's a tendency for all of us to wanna have the answer to every question and be the expert on the stage and make sure that our students don't ask anything that we can't answer. But I think just taking time to do the work, even if that comes from a position of your own expertise and then expands into these other areas can really be fruitful in terms of opening up other ideas and avenues that then you can pursue. Monty, that was such a great answer because you're explicitly asking law professors to be vulnerable and we are not good at that.  It's really important to me and through this whole series that we talk about it's not that we have to be the expert at everything and it's okay to say when we're not and I know that that impacts different professors with different identities differently but I do think it's important that as a profession we start to lean more into vulnerability and less into stage on the stage. So the question I asked is how to weave content about Indian law and indigenous identities into doctrinal classes. But I admit that weave is the wrong word. So is the word inject or integrate or infuse and the words are improper because Indian law and indigenous identities are in the law and are the law in ways that I am insufficiently describing. And really what I feel like I'm suggesting and what I think Monty is alluding to is how we stop whitewashing the curriculum instead of how we figure out how to add something. So it becomes less about well, how do I get one more case or one more idea and more about how do I have an honest reckoning with the material that's been there the whole time. Another question that sort of runs alongside this for me is how not to do this. I was really struck Matthew by your 1998 piece, Listen, about your experiences as a law student in the classroom. I'm gonna read an excerpt from it. So those engaging here with us today can fully understand the question I'm about to ask. Quote, at eight o'clock in the morning on a freezing January day, my brain is rusted and struck. The professor talks to us law students for 20 minutes about Johnson v. Macintosh. His tone is somber, but his voice is soothing. It is a story that we will just have to get through, he says. True, it is unpleasant and sad, but it will be over soon. Sometimes law takes a bad road, the professor acknowledges. Let's move on. The story of Johnson v. Macintosh, the story of conquest, murder, starvation, disease, betrayal has been laid down for all of us to hear. No reason to go over it again. The lesson has been learned already. It's a real downer. Why dwell on it at eight o'clock in the morning on a freezing January day when there is so much ahead to learn an almost unimaginable amount of information about property to master in only four months. I can hear the students now agreeing silently with the professor. We already know this story. We've heard it before. Let us not waste time. Let's move on. The 20 minute talk about Johnson v. Macintosh lasts only about 10 seconds in the weird temporal scene in Hutchins Hall. Before it sunk in, the professor began talking about the property issues of Bob Sultan. When I read this, it really struck me to my core. It is not just about how we introduce these topics or when in the classroom, but it is about the time and energy and passion and respect and honor we give these topics. Matthew, can you talk a bit based on your experiences as a law student and a law professor about how professors should engage with the materials in a way which is respectful and honors those cultures, peoples, and traditions who have been marginalized? Thanks, I'll try to call. Thanks for digging up that extremely old law review article, the first one I ever published. And so it's hard to answer that question in a short period of time, but I'll give it a shot. Let me tell you a little bit about Johnson v. Macintosh. And at the time I took the class certainly in 1995, January 95, and wrote this paper in 1998. I didn't know this, but Johnson v. Macintosh had only recently entered the canon, so to speak, of property case books. 70s, 80s, maybe even into the early 90s, more progressive property professors were trying to incorporate some Indian law into their property classes. And the reason they really wanted to do that, and in some respects now I think about it, is as kind of a proto-land acknowledgement that the sense that all lands in the United States originated originally were belonged to indigenous peoples and somehow were alienated to the European powers, the colonizing powers that came in with the prime beneficiary being the United States and the citizens of the United States, mostly the wealthy, already wealthy citizens of the United States, even to this day. And so I think what happened was that Johnson v. Macintosh was taught in the most superficial way possible for so many of us who took property in the 90s and aughties and maybe even today to some extent. And what I mean by that is we were introduced to the ideas of Johnson v. Macintosh as this is, and I remember this specifically was in my casebook and also the professor who by the way was the first time my professor had taught property, he was very open about that. In a lot of respects I liked him because of his willingness to acknowledge his own vulnerabilities and insecurities even and certainly an experience. But he said, look, this is where all property in the United States comes from. It all comes from this case, Johnson v. Macintosh, which is not true at all. The principles of Johnson v. Macintosh for the most part, the most important things that you actually learn are not really property principles. They're about federal control and federal power over Indian affairs. And that includes who is going to be authorized to purchase lands from Indians and Indian tribes. And the only property principle that shows up in Johnson v. Macintosh is the introduction of a principle that had been kicking around in theory up until that time, which was that at the time of the arrival of the colonizing nations, the colonizers, Indian tribes didn't really own their property in a way that the colonizers owned their property. And the reason for that, of course, was that Indian tribes under this theory were subhuman. They were not actually, they were not human enough to actually own property in a way that was respected by the colonizers. So those are the two key principles of that case. And how do you teach the principle of property to law students in their first year when the only principle or real principle of property in the case was that Indian people, indigenous people were subhuman and therefore they didn't really own their land effectively. So there's a lot of obfuscation, there's a lot of denial. There's an effort, I think, by property professors or was and maybe still is to just get past it as soon as you can and say, yeah, it's sort of like a land acknowledgement. We know that this used to be Indian land, let's move on. Let's talk about foxes, let's talk about anything else, but where the chain of title that exists and every single piece of property in the United States. And that's the real harm of introducing Johnson v. Macintosh, I think it comes from a really good place, but I think the outcome itself was very alienating for somebody like me. I'm pretty sure I was the only native person in my first year property section. Property was really, really a difficult thing for me emotionally, knowing that most of the property in the United States doesn't belong to a very small number of people. And that's totally irrespective of the fact that I was a descendant of indigenous peoples. So it was very difficult. And I know it was difficult for my professor who was just trying to get out of there without suffering any real huge embarrassment. And I also know, I strongly suspect that virtually everyone else in that classroom wanted to move on from talking about Johnson v. Macintosh and Indian peoples because one of two reasons are both. One reason is that Johnson v. Macintosh is not on the bar exam. And most people take property now because of the intellectual curiosity about theories of property, but because it's on the bar exam. And the other reason, of course, is that you don't want to talk about Indians. I wrote a whole book called Ghost Road where I explained my thoughts about why people really don't like Indians very much. And the one thing about Indians that people really don't like is that they know that Indian people are still here and this land used to belong to them and all of the resources upon the land. And that's a sense of shame and embarrassment for pretty much everybody in the United States who is a beneficiary of all of this. So it's a terrible emotional struggle. And if it done improperly, done wrongly, can cause a lot of damage. And I'm not here to blame my property professor for any of that stuff. I haven't spoken to him since the class. I barely remember his name, but it's very difficult to do that. Now, broadly, how do you put this material in a way how do I do this as a professor? What I do is I play around with something called historical gossip. So thankfully for Johnson versus McIntosh, there are entire books written about all of the stuff involving historical gossip about Johnson versus McIntosh, how Johnson was actually a former Supreme Court justice, how the case was a sham, that the parties were actually both attorneys for each party were paid for by a third party to create a sham Supreme Court decision, all sorts of good stuff. And the way that you can delve into the materials in any case, any class that has a case involving indigenous peoples is to, you really have to look beyond the four corners of the textbook. It's more work for a professor, but there are cases involving Indians that find themselves into casebooks. Notoriously, there's a case in torts, which is about, and if you read it, you'll think it's about parents who refuse to take their kid to the hospital and the kid dies. I can never remember the name of that case. Hopefully somebody in the Q and A can remember it. Virtually for 30 years, 40 years, it's been in virtually every torts casebook. Everybody reads it. Everybody hates those parents. They're the worst people of all time. Those people were native people who knew that if they took their sick child to the hospital, that they would never see that child again. The state would remove that child and put them in foster care and adopt them out and they would never see their kid again. And so maybe or maybe not in terms of whether it was justifiable to remove that child and take that child to the hospital is a harder question than you would know from reading the materials. And that's the real rub. I do this at Indian Law as well. It helps to sort of humanize the cases in a way that's respectful to all the parties. And that's sort of my personal take on how to do this really difficult stuff in terms of dealing with these cases that have a lot of disrespectful overtones is to try to humanize and to learn about the people involved. Thank you so much. I'm gonna turn to Rebecca to hear your perspective on this topic. Rebecca Plovel is a reference librarian and teaches in the 1L Legal Research Analysis and Writing Program at the University of South Carolina Law School. Rebecca practiced law in Arizona for 30 years. She was the chief prosecutor for the Gila River Indian Community, a deputy county attorney for the Maricopa County Attorneys Office, the Action Indian Community Prosecutor, the Pasqua Yaqui Tribal Prosecutor and Assistant General Counsel with the White Mountain Apache Trap. Rebecca still serves as a justice pro tem for the Pasqua Yaqui Court of Appeals. Rebecca, can you talk a little bit based on your identity and your experiences as a law student and a law professor about how professors should engage with the materials in a way which is respectful and honors the cultures, peoples and traditions which have been marginalized? Sure. I won't repeat everything that Matthew and Monty just said because, yes. Excuse me, sorry. First of all, I'm a member of the Muscogee Creek Nation which is part of Oklahoma Indian Territory. But I only spent a few summer vacations at my great grandmother's home in Dixby just south of Tulsa. But I got to spend time with my extended family there in Oklahoma. My great-aunt, my grandmother's sister worked for the tribe for most of her adult career work before she retired as an executive assistant in the principal chief's office at Muscogee Creek. And so I had those connections but I grew up in Arizona and California away from my own community. And I knew it was there. It was just part of my history. And when I went to law school, I lucked out in being assigned to Professor Rob Williams, one L property law class. And if anybody knows who he is, I think he's now one of the author, lead authors I think on the Getchies Indian law book. But he started property law with papal bulls, manifest destiny and talking about land thefts in the colonies from here in the US that came out of that colonization by the Spaniards which started with Columbus's ill-fated trips. And there were a whole lot of students in my class that didn't appreciate that we were getting that much more complete history about property here in the United States and where these lands came from is a bad way to put it but that was kind of, I can remember several of the students in that class just shaking their heads going, when are we gonna actually talk about property law? And my thinking was that's what we're talking about property law. And so I got that cloak, that mantle, that immersion into Indian law really early in my law career, my one L year. And I thank Rob every day for it. I clerked for a tribal judge at Pasquiyaki. I did an internship. Professor Williams actually found me some fellowship money so I got to spend another semester out there clerking for the judge helping him draft rules of court, helping they were working on a juvenile code. So I helped doing some of that drafting for the tribe and for the tribal court, which is great. And then the end of my two L year Dural Virena came out from the Supreme Court which said that one Indian tribe cannot prosecute a non-member Indian in tribal court for a crime committed on that reservation. And it didn't make a whole lot of sense to me given what I knew at that point. And that just went, okay, this is where I wanna be. This is what I need to be doing. I went into law school thinking juvenile. I was gonna be a juvenile lawyer. And this piece pushed me to wanting to do tribal law. I planned to write my substantial paper on how to fix that Dural Virena decision while Congress fixed it well before my paper was written. So I had to come up with a different process but I talked to Dural's attorney who was a flag staff attorney. A classmate of mine was from Flagstaff, Newen that made the introduction. So I interviewed him in preparation of writing my paper. At the time I didn't understand how he could be arguing against tribal jurisdiction and sovereignty. Dural was, I don't remember which tribe in Northern Arizona the crime was committed at Gila River. And now that I have been through a long career in the law, I get, and I understand where it is coming from representing his client to the best of his abilities. He was actually a court appointed attorney to represent Dural and federal court. And so, and he was basing his arguments on the Supreme Court's prior to precedence that kept shrinking tribal jurisdiction and sovereignty. He was doing a lot of criminal defense at the time and something I did later on doing criminal defense. But his viewpoint gave me a much better understanding of why he made the arguments he did as I learned more. I got to know him because I worked in Flagstaff. He was a good attorney. But it was one of those things like, how can you do this? But his focus was his client, not the bigger picture. And as Matthew just said, personalizing all that stuff, personalizing the cases, the parties, because I was seeing, you know, Dural he ran as a law school problem and he was saying Dural as a client, as a person who was getting, had been convicted in tribal court of a pretty heinous crime. So it just is one of those things where finding out that history, that information, that personalization cases. And one thing they've talked a little bit about is what I found and still finds all of the subjects I studied in law school. All of my areas of practice, whether I did those in or around or out of Indian country, juvenile, criminal, torts, contracts, property, employment law, con law, evidence, civil and criminal procedure, all of that goes on in tribal court. It's maybe a slightly different angle on stuff. You've got a different community and traditions and a different sovereign, but you're still practicing law. And it's really not that different in a lot of ways. And so I think I got way off your question here and I apologize. It's a recognition. We're working here on a land and labor acknowledgement and the struggle that I'm having with it is that whether the university or the law school can and will recognize and acknowledge their part in that dispossession and do something to make it better. Because I think that has to be there. That has to be a part of it. And I know that's kind of a later question, but I get to be retired from practice now as of the end of this summer and just be a law teacher and a librarian and loving it because I get to impart some of that history that I've learned to my students. Thanks, Rebecca. I'm actually going to follow up with that. So you teach research skills to 1Ls. Can you talk about the ways in which you integrate tribal law and indigenous issues into this instruction? Do you specifically show 1Ls where to find tribal law and West Law and Lexis? Do you use Indian law issues in your research assignments? And have you encountered any hurdles doing this work? The biggest hurdle I have with it right now is I'm so constrained with our current curriculum. Our 1L legal research program has a bunch of different sections and we all teach basically the same curriculum. So they all have the same kind of writing problems throughout the semester. And so I don't have a whole lot of time to add extra stuff. What I did do is we have a textbook that the program here has created. So we've got our own legal research text. It's online. It's on the LibGuides platform. And it's now actually open and I can send the link on here in a minute. But we rewrite or we update it every year. And so all of us librarians that teach in the program get a couple of units to update each year. And one of those that I updated this year was our US legal systems. I was like, yay, I can put tribal law in there. And I did it. I basically put a little piece in. You don't wanna quote this right. I don't wanna misquote myself. Is that the US legal system includes three systems of government, federal, state and tribal. And that each has its own sets of laws. That there aren't just the two systems for state and federal. And then I also talk about the four sources of law that we all kind of study. Constitution, states, statutes and ordinances, rules and regulations and case law. And then I add that you also have to be aware that tribal laws also come from those same four sources but they have a fifth source as well which is customs and tradition. And each tribes is different and each tribe has a different weight that they put on that. And we don't get to get in too much discussion. Students ask and I will tell them what my experience is. I have no problem doing that. You got totally off track one day in class. I'm like, okay, you guys have more homework now. And so I put in a little bit of a short explanation about kind of those foundational concepts that I quoted out of Cohen's handbook about tribal powers being inherent rather than coming from the federal government. And so I give them a little bit but I don't have time in our 1L class to really get into it. There just isn't time to do it in the program. If I can wrangle it out and do it, I would love to teach and advance a little research on Indian research and do a little bit of federal stuff but also talk about the tribal law stuff. I'm also updating for our spring semester federal regulations and just using examples in the federal regs, the Bureau of Indian Affairs various regulations and using some of those examples in our exercises. So they'll at least have some exposure that there's stuff out there that they can use. So looking at my notes here. The other thing I do is, like I said, I got off track one day in class because students were asking me questions. And so I was talking to them about my experience and working in Indian country. And I'm more than willing to do that. I got called by a librarian at another law school saying our professor that teaches American Indian law would love to have you come talk to her class. So I did a Zoom class with them. I'm gonna talk to one of our professors here, talk to her conflicts of law class about Indian law which is great. Okay, thanks, Rebecca. So my next two questions are for everybody on the panel who would like to answer them and they're more holistic to legal education generally. The first question is, how do you all advise law professors and administrators to deal with the issue of Columbus Day within and beyond the classroom? And whoever wants to start can start. Hi there. My law school just asked me to write an essay about Columbus Day. So I did. And it's sort of my own idiosyncratic take on what it's about, but I think I can probably give you a link to the thing I wrote, but I'm not really sure what to say. I think I don't spend a lot of time talking about it. So it's Indigenous People's Day for a lot of people, but it's a Columbus Day for a lot of other people. And my sense is that the fights over whether or not to have a Indigenous People's Day or Columbus Day tend to be more about Indigenous People's sort of going down their road of calling it Indigenous People's Day and totally in support of that. And on the Columbus Day end, it's not really about Columbus anymore. It's really about, for many people, it's about an Italian-American identity. There's really no holiday for Italian-American persons except for Columbus Day and they've really glommed onto it. And it's hard to disrespect that. They don't really care as much as you would think about Columbus is my sense. Columbus Day, they're losing a sense of who Columbus really is. So the main thing that I try to remember to tell people is that there was no person named Christopher Columbus. That was never his name. There was an Italian version of his name. There's a Spanish version of his name. There was no Christopher Columbus. That was a made-up thing at the beginning of the United States by a small group of people who believed that the term for America was sort of the male version of the United States and the term for Columbia or Columbus was the female version of the United States. These are things that nobody pays any attention to at all anymore. So to me, it's sort of a big nothing burger but really what it is for a lot of native law professors and even those of us who do Indian law who are not native that it's like an extra day of labor because we're always asked to speak on Indigenous People's Day or to write something about it or to do something. And this year I wrote something and I was on three panels, so it's just extra work. And I don't mind doing it. And an extra holiday is not a problem but I still have to work. I mean, I've never been at a law school that takes Indigenous People's Day off. So that, I don't know. To me, it's like it's not that big of a deal but it is definitely a deal. So it's like paying the bills, you gotta do it. Monty and then Rebecca? I would only add to that. I think it's helpful to investigate and talk more about the historical reasons why there is a Columbus Day, the reasons why it was nationalized as Matthew mentioned sort of the connections to anti-Italian immigrants and violence against immigrants. I think there's some reason to think more for those folks who are interested in talking about Columbus Day to understand why it is a holiday and to Matthew's point, what it means and what it doesn't mean and where it came from. So that would be one other option but I think that's only to the extent that folks care about Columbus Day as opposed to Indigenous People's Day. Rebecca, anything to add? Not really. I mean, I think, I know growing up to history, I got in grade school about Columbus was totally not the truth. And I think that's a lot less true now that there is a lot more information out there about really what happened. He didn't discover America. And he's not a nice person at all. In my work with tribes, none of them, of course, recognized it as Columbus Day. It was Indigenous People's Day or it was something else that they called it. Whether we got it off as a vacation day or not dependent on the tribe, I had worked for some tribes that we got all the federal holidays, whatever they were called, plus extra tribal holidays. And then I worked for a tribe that their main enterprise was farming. And so we got four holidays a year. Christmas New Year's, 4th of July and I don't know what the other one was but so we didn't get any of the other holidays. So, you know, it's, I don't celebrate it. I think I wore one of my Indigenous state slogan t-shirts that day to class and told my students, Happy Indigenous Day. But yeah, it's just one of those things that nobody's asked me what they should be doing. And so I, other than I wore my t-shirt that day I didn't do much of anything. Thanks, we have a question from the audience that hopefully someone can jump in on. A small group of us, two L's at CUNY Law, have been advocating for more Indian law doctrine programming, et cetera, as part of our strategy. We're looking to engage with our faculty curriculum committee. My question is whether an institutional requirement for integration of this material into doctrinal classes helps or hurts the cause. Does anyone wanna take that one? Yeah, I'll offer my two cents. Here's a couple of things that students should remember when they approach their faculty. Number one is that faculty members tend to be really protective of their, what they call their academic freedom. So if a faculty member doesn't want to incorporate Indian law, actively wants to avoid it, there's almost nothing you can do to force them to do that. And I think it can be counterproductive if you try to make, to mandate it. I think the better way to incorporate, to get a law school to incorporate more Indian law is to persuade the law school to hire people to teach the class, teach a class or classes in the field. I also think that the administration of the law school is would be open and receptive to knowing what the market for Indian lawyers is like, that there are almost 600 federally recognized tribes. They all have need for lawyers. States with significant Indian country, including New York, have significant need for lawyers within the state. Federal state, local governments need Indian lawyers. A lot of native attorneys who go to kind of law schools and maybe have the kind of profile that don't generate a lot of attention from big-time AM law, 100 law firms tend to get hired at those firms. It's the kind of thing that there's so much work in Indian law and it's high profile work that a law school is hurting itself by not opening those doors. That's the kind of argument that you need. You know, Derek Bell would have called it interest convergence, right? How do you get people in power to do the things you want them to do, find out that what your interests are and how they align? And that's something that law schools respond to. There's a reason I'm teaching, I'm now a faculty member at the University of Michigan. It's because students spent years making all of those arguments. And if you go to them and say, you have to do this because it's the right thing to do, I'm gonna tell you right now almost every law school will be like, well, we're a law school, we don't do right things. We do things that are to our benefit. And so make that argument. So this is an incredibly self-serving answer. However, I think that things like today are the way forward. I think that you can browbeat professors to an extent or I think you can make available and give them resources to figure out if they wanna lean into this work and how to lean into this work in a way that makes them confident that they can do it. Manage a classroom when it happens and see how important it is to the students and to our profession. One of the things that most convinced me that we need more of this is to look at the statistics about the number of attorneys who are with Indigenous heritage. The numbers are staggeringly low. And so I don't know what the most effective way is but I would say giving professors the tools to empower them to do this work themselves. They already are in the position to do it. So just giving them the tools to allow them to do it and some persuasion of how important it is. And then I think add to that that there's an open job market that is in the interest in everyone. I think that is the way forward. Monty, did you wanna jump in on this? No, I think what Matthew advised in your input is spot on. I think there's benefit in having those discussions sort of whatever form it takes. The only other thing I would mention is just that idea that proposing the integration of Indian law into courses can serve to perpetuate this idea that it's somehow outside of what law school is normally about and needs to be brought in. And I think just recognizing that in the context of these discussions helps reduce if not eliminate that marginalization, which has gone on. The idea that somehow this is a niche area of law that nobody's ever gonna practice in reality is not true. And so the more we can do to make that go away, the better. Rebecca? I was gonna just say, I got hired here at South Carolina as a librarian and they knew what my background was. Heartland, I think they hired me because I was also told but South Carolina doesn't do Indian law. Well, we are doing it and we're doing, I do it every day. And I'm adding to our textbook. I'm offering to talk to students, to talk to teachers, to come to their classes. And so I'm doing it every day, you know? It's like, yeah, law schools just need to hire the people that have some of the background and that are willing to do it. I think you're right, Matthew, that students are gonna be able to browbeat any professor into incorporating stuff in their class if they're not comfortable doing it but making the resources available that can give them that information that can help them. Add to their classes. Okay, my last question is, so I imagine most of those on today's session are not seasoned Indian law professors and instead are trying to integrate these identities, ideas and concepts into classes, not specifically on Indian law. So if the three of you could give some advice on what advice would you give our audience today generally on places to start or resources on which to rely to do more of this within their own classes? Well, I'll say, I think that there are Indian law cases in the case books already. When I was in law school, I took a class called remedies, you know, fit into my schedule, I didn't know what remedies were. And it was a half semester class. And I thought, hey, I'll be done with this class by the end of February and I was. And what I noticed by looking at the case book years later, because again, focused only on the things aside, was that the professor that assigned all the materials skipped over all the Indian law cases. It's remedies. There were a half a dozen or more cases about that involved Indian tribes. And the professor skipped every single one of them. So, you know, embrace those cases. Indian law is all over the place in constitutional law. It's all over the place in federal courts and federal jurisdiction. It can be all over the place in property and other classes. Find those cases and embrace them. Don't skip over them. By the way, the next edition of that case book, my lovely wife used, when she was at Harvard, we didn't know each other then. I looked for her edition of the case book. All of the Indian law had been scrubbed from that case book in the next edition. So, the faculty who did that case book took all the Indian law out, probably hearing from the people who adopted the case book. We don't want to do Indian law. And, you know, that's the 90s, but, you know, it's time to move on to that. So, you find those cases, embrace them. They're fun. The Indian law stuff is not boring. That's the great thing about Indian law, whether you're afraid of it or whatnot and worried about irritating somebody or, you know, embarrassing somebody or even upsetting somebody, just go for it. Those are really fun cases. They really are.  They're doing things that are designed to save the world, right? And you want to teach those cases. You want to normalize the cases where you have this small, tiny Indian tribe, say in upstate Wisconsin, that is fighting, say, Enbridge. They had River Ojibwe versus Enbridge right now. If I were teaching remedies, I would open with that case. There's a case pending right now where the Enbridge pipeline is totally in trespass on this reservation. What happens when you have something that has a piece of property on somebody else's reservation? The remedy is you take it off and pay damages. The federal court said, no, we're not taking it off because it's just Indians and who cares? This is a case we should all be talking about all the time. I would only supplement that answer by suggesting that if you read those cases then you feel like you don't have background or context in the area. There's a ton of good resources on that end too. Check out Fletcher's comic book. He's got his work, his warm book, tribal law book, Ghost Road, which you mentioned earlier. I mean, all of these things are there to help provide more background and more comfort with understanding some of the principles of Indian law that you may come across in a case about remedies that you don't know too much about. That's what they're there for. So there's other resources too that can help you feel a little bit more at ease in teaching courses in your area that implicate these federal Indian law or tribal law issues. My two cents is to reach out to your librarians. Law librarians are some of the most resourceful, smart, well-researched, genius people on our campuses, in our world really. But reach out to your law librarians and say, hey, I need some resources on this. And I would bet in every school or almost every school, they would trip over themselves to help you identify the content. And you as professors have the skills. And I think your law librarians are a good match because they can get you the support and resources that might be helpful. Rebecca? Yes. I mean, when you sent the announcement out and send this out and I sent it to all of our faculty here at South Carolina, I got a couple of surprises, replies back to me just to sending it out to the listserv going, oh my gosh, I didn't realize that you had that background. I would love to pick your brain. I would love to have you come to maybe talk to my class. Can you look at my syllabus and see what else I need to add? And I was like, yay. But, which was odd because they all should have known what my background was, but I guess I weren't paying attention. I'm just a librarian. I'm a regular faculty member, but yeah. I'm sorry, Rebecca, I'm gonna interrupt you because this is my show. Please do not ever say you're just a librarian. That's what they say. Right, not on this panel. No, I don't feel like I'm just a librarian at all. So thank you. There are questions that we didn't get to. There are questions in the chat we didn't get to. And I feel like we just got the ball rolling and time is up. I wanted to say thank you to the panelists today. You were so good that I will email you all and ask you to come back again. Please don't dodge my emails. Thank you to our hosts, Roger Williams, CUNY Law, Berkeley Law, GW Law, and Jurist. Thank you especially to those behind the scenes like Chelsea and Morgan who do so much work. We don't see them, but they're there. And finally, thanks to you to our attendees. We're doing this work because we think it's important and we're hoping that this content really interacts with you and moves you forward and you want to ask questions and have feedback. And so I would welcome to hear from you all. If you have thoughts, ideas, feedback, comments, need resources, please reach out to me and I can sort of get you where you need to go. Our next session is in November on the topic of teaching diversity skills in bar-tested classes. Thanks everyone for spending some bit of their afternoon with us and have a great rest of the day.


So Trump's Twitter just disappeared for about 12 minutes and The world is freaking out Now it already came back and Twitter said it was in a mistake, but in that 12 minutes You've seen basically half of America including 90% of the various news outlets rejoice and use that opportunity to talk about how Happy they were that he's gone now, you know finally the and Twitter says sorry it was a Quote-unquote, you know a human error. It was an employee's mistake and they're like, you know people say Promote that employee ask him to do it again and finally we had a few minutes without the guy and That really reminded me of something that I went through when I started going viral a Year and a half ago because I made some pretty provocative Videos kind of caricature just saying like yeah, I make more money than you your mom your dad your Sister your brother everybody combined and it became like a living meme in Israel and people Genuinely hated me so about 90% of the people that saw it Got offended.  No, he's probably a dick and People not even they don't even make up like stories They just try to find a way to kind of poke a hole in your narrative they want to see the chink in the armor they want to see that weakness in you and For someone like me who's very kind of neurotic and Very self-conscious on on how I affect people and it's very important for me to affect people positively. I realized early on that I Have to be completely ethical in the way that I conduct myself and I realized it because for a long time I was not ethical and they made a lot of mistakes and People really really hated me and the fact that I had a huge spotlight on me. Oh God that was That was horrible. That was extremely horrible like imagine every mistake you've made like There's a thousand people that are just waiting to See you make that mistake and just waiting for the slightest hint of Incongruency because you're on a different standard now because you're you know, you're famous So I would like this to be kind of a cautionary video and urge you to Work on two things if you plan on being famous one day as most of the people who follow me do The first thing is you want to work on your ethics You want to do deep deep work on your ethics and this means Taking yourself up with honesty and looking at your behavior and seeing where are you not proper and fair with other people where have you been rationalizing Certain lies to yourself about the way you behave with others.  Like that's like the literally the best thing you can do at that time when you're a kid. It's it's the line is amazing But I had to phase it later on because the thing is imagine you're like a ship and the more famous you become the higher it's like the higher the ship goes into space and The atmosphere changes and the pressure Goes up Immensely to the point where maybe, you know, if you're at the bottom You can have a lot of problems with the ship and nothing happens then you start to rise up a bit and then the Foundations are checked. So it's you know, if you actually can go even start climbing up But then once you're actually on the up-and-up cycle and the pressure Penentially grows and now if you have even a loose screw one loose screw in the ship Then that small mistake is going to be magnified So much that the pressure is going to go all all the pressure is going to concentrate there The screw is gonna like bash out and everything is gonna Explode kind of like what's happening right now with Kevin Spacey, for example, who? just recently was discovered alleged that he Attempted to rape a 14-year-old boy and suddenly I just checked the news today. Oh apparently he also That was 20 years ago, by the way, and then now it's apparently he he's also abused people on set for his show the house of cards so Everything starts to come back to hunt you like when you're successful or famous you can't do anything Wrong and that's not necessarily a bad thing because you can make mistakes, but you can't be unethical any sort of Lack of ethics where you're not completely straight and congruent would crush you another example would be imagine like you're holding it There's a straight bar some sort of like a straw and You're applying Downward pressure on it. You're trying to crush it down now if it's not complete if it's not balanced If it's like a bit crooked to one side or another the pressure is gonna Like break one side and just gonna either break or or get squashed like to one side But if it's completely straight like Absolutely parallel to the wall then if you try to press it down It's gonna have immense power and it's gonna maintain its stability Because it's a perfect structure and perfect structures are very very hard to to chip or break So you have to get the higher your Fame goes the higher ethics has to go and if you want to get famous You know one of those people that you're one of those people that like you know I want to be ultra famous or I want to you know get noticed You should get your ethics in line ahead of time because if you don't You're gonna get crushed.  I don't think that's true I think that people inherently We don't really care what people think unless we think we did something wrong and if you come if you have a your ethics down and you have really really good set of values that you've practiced and Grounded over years Then as long as you stay aligned with those those values Not nobody can say anything that will you know put you off your guard because you've already Been there you've already thought it through that's why thinking about ethics is so freakin important And that's why when you see what happening what's happening in Hollywood with Harvey Weinstein and you know hiding like 60 plus cases, you know just reported probably hundreds of cases of Sexual and taking sexual advantage of women sexual assault rape Nobody talks about it. You know nothing happens. It's literally just a Crooked foundation of ethics and it's not these people's thoughts because the problem is once you become famous You're under Completely different pressure and again, I can say it from experience. That's why I'm telling you what's so freakin important When you're famous now people really want to see you fall not everybody but a lot of people and If you're in Success business, you know kind of trying to get people to become better than usually like 90% of the people want to see you fall and 10% really love you and if you're like an actor maybe 20% of the people hate you and 80% love you and if you're a politician then half hate you in half love you Even Trump one of the you know quote-unquote the most hated presidents About half the country hates him but about half the country doesn't so It's really hard to go beyond that and it's really funny that On a proportional scale people hate present like the they hate success coaches more than they hate the president But anyway, once you're actually in the spotlight once you're actually in the air you can't make repairs and that's the problem because you're already under heavy heavy heavy heavy pressure and So you don't have time to kind of fix things, but let's say at that You did make a mistake and somehow got away with it The thing is you can't repent now because how the way ethics work is you make a mistake You acknowledge the mistake and then you move on but when you're under intense intent very crazy pressure from being famous you can't Just give it out.  It's too late. You can't really Do anything because everything will be under the spotlight. So any lack of Any any forgetfulness or any Kind of waiting from our side to Work on your ethics to the highest level you can currently reach You're gonna pay a hundredfold for that later Because when you're there, it's too late. That's really the problem. It's like When's the time to get insurance?  When's the best time to handle your finances and increase your income? It's not when the bank sends you the letter that your house is gonna be foreclosed in a month It's it's at the very start of the journey So, yeah, I just I just love ethics and Because I made so many mistakes and I'm lucky to be here and After being crushed so many times because of my problems with ethics, I had to fix them I really really had to fix them. I had no choice. That was the only way to get back up After I lost everything. So I had to regain everything again and the way I want to finish this is one way to Get a lot better at seeing ethical decisions and becoming more ethical is to read really horrifying shit like For example, I'm reading right now the book the gulag archipage. Oh archipage sorry the gulag archipelago and It was written by a guy named Alexander Solzhenitsky who served in the Soviet regime Before kind of Stalin came into power and he got arrested like tens of millions of people there who you know the Soviets the Bolsheviks the non-communists and Apparently, you know after you read the book you realize that Hitler and the Nazis were kind of It could be argued that they're in very tiny in terms of in terms of their Evil and how much death and shit they done next to the hundred million people that died in communist Russia and You just hear the worst stories of humanity ever you Really get a capacity for how evil people can be and also how Similar to you they are meaning that you can be that person too because you're human like they don't have a distinction You can also read The book by Dostoevsky Which you know many people read when they were young, but you can come back to it now Crime and punishment Again also deeply Thinking about morality and how a regular person could be Could become a mortar a murderer and what happens to your soul When you do that and by recognizing evil You are much Better able to recognize it in yourself It is actually the the the people who are naive But that I'm scared of the people who do not recognize evil because the person who did not contend with his evilness that is within him Doesn't think it exists that person is probably the most likely to be the first one that puts on the Nazi uniform when it's what makes sense because just like a person who Never practiced martial arts would be the first to Lose the battle against people who are very trained a person who never Trained in ethics would be the first to lose his ethics When he comes under challenged.  There's very few maybe three to five percent probably even less Maybe even one percent of the people who actually are deeply ethical and care about values and commitments Versus the others who you know may or may not but It's situational. It's genetic. There's no It was not thought of it was not created through determination. It was created through Simply, you know Good luck That's my message for you kind of a grim but You know Any talk about ethics that is not at its root Grim and acknowledgement of How we can be unethical is not a real talk about ethics And I highly urge you that if you do want to become successful you listen to the guidelines I gave you right now and Even before working on that thing which will supposedly make you successful Focus on your ethics because They are the really the great thing that protects you from destroying your life at any point in the journey And I would even argue that the more ethical you are When you do choose to become successful and famous Then it is easier because The ethical person the one who's thought it through And is a court working according to his ethics Is he's free. He's he knows what he's doing He knows he's good So you have a lot more power when you don't doubt yourself So I hope this helps you feel free to subscribe if you haven't yet Check out the links in the description to either book a coaching call with me Get my free e-book for traveling while making thousand dollar sales Or by my autobiography about Myself Thanks for watching again, and I'll talk to you soon


Reyes and Yankees tied up in the 11th Kitchards on the mound for the Reyes. This one's brought to you by DraftKings. When you download the app, use promo code Johnboyd. Let him know. I sent you. Brett Gardner is going to get out on this one two pitch, but it moves Gary Sanchez to third base, which is a big storyline in Yankeesland because everybody knows Gary Sanchez is the double water bottle guy during celebrations. And if he's going to score the winning run, how is he going to do the double water bottle celebration? If you don't know what I'm talking about, look at some past breakdowns. Oh, but look, there's Gary in the background. He's also got two water bottles. Gary Sanchez is double water bottling because, of course, he's double water bottling. He's chosen that role. Or maybe it's chosen him. I don't know, but we've seen it three times now in the last five days. Gary Sanchez double water bottle. So you see the man has a role. Clint Frazier takes the first fast ball. Oh, and one says, I wish I would have swung at it. I think I'm going to swing it. The next one does hits a bullet to the front row in left field for the walk-off home run. And the first thing we have to do is celebrate the first man up.  He almost beat Clint. He was the first one to celebrate. I also love doing this. If you don't know, Clint Frazier, his scouting report when he came up, was legendary bat speed. And watch when we go frame by frame, how deep the ball gets before he starts his swing. I'm just going one frame, next frame, next frame, next frame, next frame, and next frame. All the way there. It always blows my mind from there to there, from there to there in one single frame. And then he keeps the barrel in the zone for one frame, two frames, three frames, which is pretty impressive. So I always find that fascinating. Just really quick hands. And he knew it was gone. I mean, it was front row, but he knew it. He loved it. He enjoyed it. He watched it. Good for him. And then a little hop, skip, wearing Brecht Gardner's pants.  And Judge says, come on down. And Wade says, come on.  And he's going to abide by Glaber's request. And he's going to shoot it into the pile.  And then out of nowhere, Gary comes with two water bottles. How'd he get them so fast? He scored. And then he drops one out of his left hand. Oh, no, his whole thing. Nope. Don't worry. He catches it. And he goes back to be in the double water bottle guy, because that's his role.  Kind of manhandling him. Kind of weird sight. Good for everyone, though. Another look at Gary. I don't know how he got the water bottle so fast. He scored the winning run. He must have ran in, grabbed two. He knew he couldn't just grab one. This one in his left hand, it slips. It's out of his hand. And he scoops it up and keeps going. Impressive as impressive gets. Gary Sanchez is the double water bottle celebration guy. And this one was brought to you by DraftKings. Go to DraftKings when you download the app. Use promo code Johnboy. Bet on the games. If you bet on the Yankees on this one, you would have won. If you bet on the over, you would have won. Because it was a two-run homerun. Took the over. How about that?


I looked at Synology Drive's update notes. The second thing there, not the first, the second thing in the update. The first was like, you know, bug fixes and performance updates. I don't know, it was something else. It was something specific, but very vanilla.  That sounds great. The second thing was adds the ability to edit Synology Drive documents and sheets to the iOS app. It's like, this is huge.


Welcome to Toffey TV, it is the Everton News Daily, Duncan Ferguson has held his press conference ahead of Sunday's trip to Old Trafford to Face Manchester United. And there is unfortunately some bad news on the injury front once again. Morgan Snydlen and Theo Wolcott are both going to miss the game. In fact Theo Wolcott could be out for the entire Christmas period, he's likely to be out for up to three weeks. Morgan Snydlen, possible two weeks, both got muscle injuries. Probably brought on by the fact that they had to run a lot more on Saturday for the Everton team. There does seem to be a little bit of a hint that some of these players are unfit and weren't up to the levels, required to put in performances like that. Maybe that's what Everton should do is go out there and look for a new fitness coach. Maybe bring back Dave Billows who was so successful as David Muiz's conditioning coach. Also worked with Tony Bellew as well. So maybe he's someone we should bring in to get these players fit because at the moment our players are dropping like flies. Not easy to get players up to that level that you want them to be up to at this time of year. It's the case of having them tick over. You want them to put the hard yards in in pre-season and that clearly wasn't done and we clearly have a squad that don't have the levels at the moment. So those two players definitely missing, Jerimine, Llywodraeth, Seamus Coleman, Fabian Delph all in light training. We'll have to see if any of those players make it. Hopefully Llywodraeth won't be missing at the weekend. Hopefully Jerimine. If we could get those four players in and around the squad for the weekend that would be a massive boost with the Christmas period coming up with Leicester, Wednesday, Arsenal, Saturday, Burnley on Boxing Day. And then a trip to Newcastle followed by a trip to Man City followed by a trip to Anfield. It'd be nice to just have some of those players coming back. And then hopefully January time we can get maybe Kabam on back. So lots to think about for Duncan Faggs and obviously going to be really difficult from going to Old Trafford this weekend. And there in good form. And when you look at those injuries, he's got a tough task ahead of him. But the big question is will he be in charge after Sunday's game? Will there be a new manager? There's obviously been a lot of rumours in the last week or so. Call of Angelotti is the latest favourite. Obviously David Moyes is still in there. But another name that I made today is the name of Michael Artheta, who was obviously a name that came out quite early when people were talking about a new manager. But it was sort of dismissed, put to one side. Lots of talk about Man City not willing to let him go. Pep Guardiola saying that this is not the right time. But it seems like the Everton board are talking about him. Listen, the list of candidates for the Everton manager isn't that long and isn't that good. Call of Angelotti, who's now available, has sprung to the top because he's a very successful manager at Champions League clubs. Does he shoot Everton? Does he shoot what Everton's needs are at this point in time? Would he put the energy into it? That is required to tell him Everton round. A lot of people out there would say yes and I can't really argue with those people when it looks just track record. But maybe Everton now are looking at something like Michael Artheta and thinking this could be exactly what we need. A young coach who's ready to take the lead as the manager. And maybe following on from what we've seen last week with Duncan Ferguson's first game, knowing that an ex-blue would get the crowd onside straight away. And maybe having people like Duncan Ferguson around them who knows people like Tim Kale, people like Lee Carsley. That could really galvanise the fan base, galvanise the club and drive us forward. Personally I would love to see an ex-Everton and be the next manager. I don't know whether that's possible. I'd love to see that. There's just something about the connection between the fans and ex-players that really helps and really gets the crowd going. But Michael Artheta has definitely been spoken about at boardroom level. It's whether the people in the boardroom can get their heads together and make a decision that they are all happy with. And at the moment that seems to be the stumbling block on moving forward on a manager. So we'll have to wait and see. Plenty of food for thought. Maybe we'll find out more next week. But it'll be a difficult job getting Michael Artheta out of Man City at this time. It'll also probably be difficult convincing to come to evidence taking over where we are at the moment. But listen, he's the assistant manager at Man City at the moment. I'm sure if all things are equal becoming his first managerial job being at Everton, I'm sure that would be something that he probably would jump at. It just depends on the time more than anything else. In other news today. It's been very busy for Friday. Normally I only talk about the press conference. In other news today, it's been revealed that Everton will put in the planning permission for the Bramley Mawls Dock stadium on the 23rd of December. So next week. Next Monday is it? Next Monday? No, next Monday. The following Monday, sorry. With some slight changes to the original plan that we've all seen. A lot of the changes are not too drastic. It all comes down to heritage. Everton are looking to restore a lot of the original features of the area. Bringing cobbles in and lamps, street lamps and moorings for the boats tradition. I'm trying to get it. Listen, the big stone one block with this stadium as we've always known is the heritage side of it. Convincing things like English heritage, UNESCO, these things that. Are really the only issue I think. The stadium is being designed. Money apparently isn't going to be a problem. It all comes down to convincing the heritage people that we are not decimating the area, which is mad considering if you go down there now and see what's there. So helping with that trying to restore a lot of the old features and buildings that are surrounding it will go some way to helping drive that forward. I've obviously looked at the second part of the consultation and found issues maybe they need to improve on. Listen, if you look at the results, there aren't many and it's minuscule but I'm not trying to go to the absolute finest detail on this and making sure that every box is ticked and every T is crossed and every I is dotted. And listen also on that.  Liverpool and that part of Liverpool is very traditional looking city in terms of old buildings and we want to keep that. It'd be fantastic to go to this new modern stadium but setting an old traditional area and obviously part of the stadium reflect that as well. So I'm all on board for that and hopefully that gets it through and hopefully that gets it to a position where in the next three months we get given the go ahead and then we can get H Bade in the ground and start building this thing. I think other than the looking at possibly the summer, all things going well is the time they can get started. So let's hope it does. So that's a good piece of news obviously going into the new year. So 23rd it will be submitted for the council to look at and then if anyone else needs to look at possibility of it going in front of obviously the government rather than the local planning permission. So let's hope it just gets plan permission from but with it being such a huge project, it might be called just to be looked at because of all the money involved and all the logistics around it. So we'll wait and see on that. Anyway, let us know your thoughts in the comments and anything I spoke about. Don't forget to check out the match preview that is available now. If you're on Patreon, the footie show is now available as well. So make sure you check that out to start at 11 also and any of the other great videos we've done this week. And if you still haven't watched the Duncan Fagnes interview, why haven't you watched it? Go and check that out immediately. If you haven't already subscribed, please do click the bell for alerts so you know exactly when a video drops. More videos join us on Patreon. Monday is the final day to buy something from our shop. The link is in the description. Christmas jumpers or any of our hoodies or t-shirts. If you want them in time for Christmas, Monday is the day. Also, there's a link in the description for the Everton direct shop. If you're buying anything off there and want a little bit of discount and want to help us in the process, there's a link in there as well. Like this training top that I have to wear because it's white and it means that the green screen doesn't ruin it. Make sure you check out the links in the description. Thanks for watching. See you later.


with action and suspense out of the Old West comes the most famous hero of them all Hopalong Cassidy starring William Boyd the ring of the silver spurs heralds the most amazing man ever to ride the prairies of the early West Hopalong Cassidy this famous hero thrills his 60 million fans with action and dangerous adventure in the role of Hopalong Cassidy is the popular star of the motion picture series William Boyd and now another exciting story of the early West Gunsmoke rides the stagecoach trail in these early days of the West common way to travel is by stagecoach it's generally a long hot trip with no excitement unless a holed up man decides to stop the stage and liven things up by robbing the storm box and the passengers well in our story today driver Corrigan of the Ridge City bound stage has just looked down the barrel of a six gun as the stage was relieved of the mine payroll when the gunman departed Corrigan whipped up his horses and raced the remaining two miles into Ridge City get the sheriff quick the stage has been held up about a mile back took the whole dirt payroll just one of them give me you took to mind every red centipede the farm it's corrigan what's happened held up got held up I'm really the handkerchief over its face in the black hat horse didn't see none only thing I noticed was that gun barrel looked like a stove pipe to me good night how you look well he's about your side Bert black hat and I noticed when he turned sideways had red hair hanging out from under his hat yeah that's nice to appreciate that near the bar 20 I'm thinking the same thing well let's go get him on yeah for either Moses with a payroll yeah he's got a lot of explaining to do how about the sheriff we don't need the sheriff it's our money in it well that's right seems like you're overset and pinning it on the nest what you mean by that corrigan lots of fellas his size and your size we're waiting time boy come on you're right you'll be heading for the open spaces if we plan around here we got the law here Bert government will send a man I ain't asking the law to collect my pay I can do it myself come on boys we'll clean out this nest and spread what's a girl now back to hop along Cassidy and our story gun smoke rides the stagecoach trail stagecoach running into Ridge City has been held up by a lone gunman and the payroll for the mines about twenty thousand dollars was taken when the driver reported the holdup the miners decided from the description that the gunman is a red headed nested by the name of Pritchard tempers flair and the miners led by Bert Neil ride to the nesters ranch house hop along Cassidy unaware of what's happening at the neighboring ranch is on the porch of the bar 20 talking with a gentleman so I told judge doors I'd convey his greetings to you mr. Cassidy that I have done and I would appreciate your being my guest for dinner soon at my hotel hotel but mr. Butterfield no friend of judge door stays at a hotel when they're this close to the bar 20 the judge told me you would say exactly that mr. Cassidy but I'm used to being alone you can be to yourself here sir and you'd like it a lot better than the ridge hotel nobody to bother you lots of son I'm afraid you make it impossible for me to do other than accept your hospitality good California be back from town any minute now and professional man leads a stilted life very stilted sir we don't ask the man is business around here mr. Butterfield but I take it you're a lawyer for 15 years I had my own office buried my nose in law books working day and night to build a future only to have a crush about my ears mining no no it was a young woman I'd hope would be Mrs. Butterfield but come let's not be morbid that's the past I'm living now for the future mr. Cassidy that's the way to look at it a month or so here in the sun good food and friends and you'll be a new man but a few if you're sure that I won't be that's not say another word I've left my bag at the hotel California can get it for you later this evening you're very kind here come to California now my what a remarkable horseman wrong or he wouldn't be riding that's what the stage has been held up well don't lose your breath hello with red hair took a whole learn payroll every cent of it oh back up just a minute was your manners California we have company you know they're saying red Pritchard the the nesters the vomit California oh excuse me hoppy turn it meet mr. Butterfield friend of Jeff Dawes up in Preston howdy Bert Neal's head in a bunch of minors and ran he's out to Pritchard's place what for us won't come out looks like trouble where's your law he's out of town my rule is bad rule mr. Cassidy I know red Pritchard he's a nester but not a bandit you make yourself at home mr.  Butterball Butterfield California yeah yeah Butterfield a poor fellow he'd had more company at the hotel well well I've been waiting for you so I must have Butterfield you'll have to excuse us for being late ridiculous I'll tell you ridiculous I've been having the time of my life I hope you won't mind my trying my hand at cooking food yes I took the liberty of preparing a meal when it got late and I am good you have no idea how good this is going to taste it wasn't much to get mr. Buttercup but Butterfield California how droll judge Dawes knew what he was about when he advised my looking you up I'm warning you I'm not too much of a yeah the very first time I had enough to eat for a week California your mouth I know I filled it I didn't do so badly for a bachelor if you ever decide to cook for a career let us know well helping better be riding back in the draw got lots to do yet tonight must you go again won't be long maybe you can find a book or something now don't concern yourself with my welfare I'll find us to do to keep busy we'll go in town tomorrow and make up for this mr. Butterfield oh Tish touch but isn't riding at night dangerous back in the draw horse might stumble you know well we just ride to the peak and then put it down to the shed you know where everything is mr. Butterfield if we're late just get a good night's sleep no tellin what time we'll get back good evening curly my boy I have news of great importance for you cut out that fancy palaver jinx if you ever mentioned jinx again you swine I'll slit your throat well now I didn't mean no harm we've got to work fast Cassidy I'm at stupid cowpoke California a meeting this nested when right now you know where the droids should do mine shaft near it no right where it is did you plant the paper bands off that money out near the nest is fence good we've got to beat Cassidy to the shaft and keep that nester out of sight until we make one more stage grab how about Cassidy he's a tough hombre dead men aren't tough men you mean you see this little 45 bullets all polished up I see it what's it for when you bid farewell to your host you always leave him a little gift of appreciation I'm leaving this right in his back now back to hop along Cassidy and gun smoke rides the stagecoach trail a hold up was occurred in Ridge City and the stage robbed of the $20,000 mine payroll some hot-blooded miners accused a nester red Pritchard of being the gunman meantime a cultured gentleman named Butterfield arrives at the bar 20 saying that he is a great friend of hoppy's pal Judge Dawes so hoppy is offered in the usual Cassidy hospitality but now we learn that the visitor is a very much wanted hold-up man and is working with the minor curly their edge in their way toward the old mine shaft where the nester is hiding how'd you find out where the nest is hiding that overfed underbrain California let it drop sure was a smart thing you moving in there and then telling you everything you want to know yes it takes real brains to keep the law off for seven years and I'll take it easy right across the creek there up about 60 feet an old mine shaft must be the one and we're here ahead of Cassidy good are we going to get over there we don't go over there then we don't leave Prince I'm using this rifle I practice by shooting hummingbirds at a thousand feet yeah I seen you do it stay behind this folder you can see when he moves around back in there that opening behind him silhouettes in perfectly how long you staying around gents I mean what a field one more payroll then back to Kansas City I gotta lay low for a while after you get you will wait there he is in that opening and hardly see back in there I see good enough you got him he's down of course I never miss convenient isn't it to have that dead master take the blame for two whole laps I wish it weren't quite so simple I'm getting a little bored fellas like is not to break his neck if that move weren't out not much further now California mine entrance is just around these rocks you know something I'll be I don't think red Pritchard had one darn thing to do with that stage order it's not for us to judge but gosh 10,000 that it buy a whole room full of meatballs with green under the yeah careful not drop down the lead maybe we better let him know who we are he's scared like it's not he'll be a shooting that's a good idea better call him to him red come on you come on come on back California he's down happy what's wrong with him it's Cassidy red he ain't moving come on California he's hit now he's breathing someone beat us here he looks like he caught it in the shoulder tie up the wound stop that bleeding gotta get home boys Mary lose alone let me go take it easy red it's Cassidy Cassidy and I was thinking you was my friend we are red we just found you this week how do you feel red shoulders doing some throbbing just got creased red feel up to leaving here where you taking me the only place I know it was safe for you as a bar 20 you'd be mighty hard to take out of there seems like we should let the sheriff know about red that we got him out here in our barn plenty of time for that we want whoever we read to believe he's dead show your hands I ain't saying a word to nobody about where he is even if they cut out my tongue I know that California I'm gonna need all the help you can give me because I've got a feeling that something's going to happen and right soon you know I feel plummeting Mr. Barfield the way we been doing well you got it right this time we'll make it up once we get time well glad you're back won't you join me in a game of P knuckle sure like to Mr. Butterfield but I'd better get washed up a bit your sleeve you hurt Mr. Cassidy hurt hmm hmm blood what happened oh I know when we moved the master we got blood on us great Scott you mean something happened to the poor man is there no law no protection he's all right now don't let it upset you sir they ain't finding the more he is now I must say you're a friend and need Mr. Cassidy and I know a little about treating a wound you know no he's resting very well you're here to enjoy yourself well you know best of course I couldn't induce you to play a little P knuckle in how we don't play much courage I'm a poor loser myself sure a poor loser haha you're nothing like judge Dawes well I played P knuckle all evening with him just a dollar a game and how he complained when he lost mr. Butterfield I hope you understand why we can't spend more time with you perfectly indeed I do me well I feel a little fresh yeah would do me a world of good like to join me Mr. Cassidy well not right now maybe later well I won't be long don't worry about me at all it's a fiction to get dark don't get lost I don't go far well I better get cleaned up California I have some writing to do hmm writing yeah forgot to get a get a couple of things in town won't take me over an hour to you stay around keep an eye on red Pritchard oh shucks hoppy we can't keep bread in a hay barn long with his holder like that I'll have a talk with the dock in town be right back during you ain't gonna get much sleep hoppy I've got a feeling that you're not too far wrong California Butterfield what are you posting in my cabin for what's wrong very curly Cassidy catching on that Cassidy it's the nest the nest I miss my shot at him how do you know Cassidy and that car poke friend of his brought the nest of the ranch blood on both of them maybe he's hit so bad he can't talk I don't think so well what are we gonna do there's only one thing to do kill the nester before he talks spoils our next grab with him being found there isn't gonna be any next grab curly I may have to leave rather sudden so get out that 10,000 and I'll take my hat I'm leaving with you you're doing no such thing you're still following orders but I ain't gonna Butterfield that six gun I say you're still following orders sure of course I am what do you want me to do I want you to ride in round up those miners get them in a hating mood and bring them out to the bar 20 get the nester get him if you have to burn the barn down line in the hay barn I scouted the barn while taking a short walk for air thought I've heard someone moaning you know what you're asking me to do don't you what do you mean Cassidy's bad medicine I entangle him with him you don't have to I'll be there and cite the miners to rush the barn and then take the nester out Liga like start for town with them fair trial and all that body is where he didn't do it certainly the answer to it is this he's not gonna get to town push weapon how crude of course not he tried to escape and the boys had to shoot simple I'm done glad you're on my side Butterfield now let's split the money then get to town and stir up the miners and ride for that nester feeling better red man sure do nice a doctor coming clear out here just for me no shocks doctors don't ask who's hit the hurt isn't there any way I can take my father home Mr. Cassidy not yet Mary it isn't safe turned if I wouldn't like to get that guns in my sights I'll make gun red suffer like this I don't think red will have to stand it much longer did you hear that daddy oh how wonderful to be like we was I can't stand it you're being hunted like an animal well he's safe for the time being I hear riders I know I expected you expected it my gun hop along I can stay where you are red don't come out Mary you stay here to have to leave you but stay where you are come on California we'll take our stand in front of this door California to against that mob you know what it'll mean as they take red Pritchard now back to hop along Cassidy Cassidy we come to get the fellow robbers of our payroll meaning who meaning the nester red Pritchard we know he's here we know he's here how do you know he's here keep in talking ain't gonna stop us Cassidy now move aside we're going in come ahead curly you boys heard curly say he's going in we say he ain't make your move curly well are we gonna wait all night boys let's get on with the work maybe you're wrong curly maybe the nester he's in that barn and he's coming out if we have to burn it down we want him to drop this I don't blame you for that curly and I'm going to give him to you what's that hoppy are you local I mean just when I said then hand him over and let's get him in child get ready for anything now great Scott Mr. Cassidy what's the row the boys want to hold up artist and in heaven's name why don't you give him to them I'm going to do just that Jenks what's up stay back curly something 20 years shooting a man in cold blood Cassidy Jenks is all right he'll have a sore hand for a while there's your stage robber boys take him in I got plenty of proof they're taking you too curly I'll not go alone remember this and someday I'll even the score we'll meet again you can drop the dramatic butterfield the only thing you'll meet as I hang new that's right come on butterfield and no funny all right I'll go but don't worry I'll get it well now don't you sit there grinning like a chassis cat hoppy you know during well you got some explaining to do yeah I guess I have California it was the telegram hmm what telegram I sent a telegram to judge doors when I went in for the doc I thought you was going a long time just to get doc judge doors said he never heard of butterfield but the check and see if my description didn't fit a fellow by the name of Jenks well I know hoppy but how did you know to send a telegram to judge doors turned if I suspicion anything wrong well you see California Butterfield slipped when he mentioned P Knuckle the judge hates cards like a rattlesnake never played a hand in his life good boy from hop along Cassidy so an exciting adventure ends for hoppy in California we hope you'll be back with us soon when hoppy will again bring you more adventure and excitement hop along Cassidy star and William Boyd is transcribed and produced in the West by Walter White Jr. Gunsmoke rides the stagecoach trail was written by Howard Swart all stories are based upon the characters created by Clarence E. Mulford this is a Commodore production