Jul 3, 2026 · 56 min · 11 segments
Outlaw's first crossover episode with Live Like the World is Dying! This conversation covers the June 16, 2026 federal charges alleging a 15 person conspiracy to interfere with ICE activity during and…
But my question to start for Mo, Garrett, Miriam, if you have an answer, can we just talk a little bit about why a conspiracy case like this is really significant in a movement context or just any context? What do charges like this mean for defendants' lives?
So the thing that is attractive to prosecutors about conspiracy charges is that a conspiracy, to prove a conspiracy, you have to demonstrate that two or more people made an agreement to do something that would constitute an unlawful act.
And that after making that agreement, they took steps in an effort to carry out that agreement to do something illegal.
Well, what constitutes an agreement, right? And what constitutes the kind of substantial steps that someone might take in the service of carrying out such an agreement? This is a very broad category of behavior, and it captures a huge amount of conduct that otherwise we might think of as clearly First Amendment protected conduct, like assembly or speech, expressive conduct, right? Well, what a conspiracy charge enables prosecutors to do is to criminalize whole communities of people and to criminalize behaviors that are not only lawful behaviors, but constitutionally protected behaviors.
And when I say criminalize, what I mean is to treat those communities or to treat those behaviors as though they are crimes, whether or not on their own they actually are.
And so by saying, well, this group of people made an agreement to do something illegal, prosecutors are able to capture a very large number of people who have not, in fact, carried out any criminal conduct.
And of course, this is significant in a movement context for the same reason it's significant in any other community where we see the widespread use of conspiracy charges.
And notably, I think it would be irresponsible of us not to point out that conspiracy charges are, we often see them in working class communities of color.
They're used to criminalize social activity and association, which of course is no less First Amendment protected in the context of working class communities of color.
where we see a long history of conspiracy charges being used to fragment, isolate, and devastate Black families in all kinds of environments, right, from the American South to urban centers.
And so we see these charges being brought in movement context in ways that are quite disruptive to political work, right? We see these politically motivated charges against communities that are organizing with each other.
And that not only disrupts that work that's already happening, but it functions to frighten other people away from doing that kind of work.
And it exacts a real cost from not only those individuals who are charged, but their families, their communities, and the work.
while also obscuring the actual political message by making the message seem to be purely criminal.
Can we talk a little bit about the historical context for how conspiracy cases have been used as a tool to crush dissent? Because while it feels like it's happening a lot right now, or in the past five years, in a way that it wasn't before, this also isn't new.
But my question to start for Mo, Garrett, Miriam, if you have an answer, can we just talk a little bit about why a conspiracy case like this is really significant in a movement context or just any context? What do charges like this mean for defendants' lives?
So the thing that is attractive to prosecutors about conspiracy charges is that a conspiracy, to prove a conspiracy, you have to demonstrate that two or more people made an agreement to do something that would constitute an unlawful act.
And that after making that agreement, they took steps in an effort to carry out that agreement to do something illegal.
Well, what constitutes an agreement, right? And what constitutes the kind of substantial steps that someone might take in the service of carrying out such an agreement? This is a very broad category of behavior, and it captures a huge amount of conduct that otherwise we might think of as clearly First Amendment protected conduct, like assembly or speech, expressive conduct, right? Well, what a conspiracy charge enables prosecutors to do is to criminalize whole communities of people and to criminalize behaviors that are not only lawful behaviors, but constitutionally protected behaviors.
And when I say criminalize, what I mean is to treat those communities or to treat those behaviors as though they are crimes, whether or not on their own they actually are.
And so by saying, well, this group of people made an agreement to do something illegal, prosecutors are able to capture a very large number of people who have not, in fact, carried out any criminal conduct.
And of course, this is significant in a movement context for the same reason it's significant in any other community where we see the widespread use of conspiracy charges.
And notably, I think it would be irresponsible of us not to point out that conspiracy charges are, we often see them in working class communities of color.
They're used to criminalize social activity and association, which of course is no less First Amendment protected in the context of working class communities of color.
where we see a long history of conspiracy charges being used to fragment, isolate, and devastate Black families in all kinds of environments, right, from the American South to urban centers.
And so we see these charges being brought in movement context in ways that are quite disruptive to political work, right? We see these politically motivated charges against communities that are organizing with each other.
And that not only disrupts that work that's already happening, but it functions to frighten other people away from doing that kind of work.
And it exacts a real cost from not only those individuals who are charged, but their families, their communities, and the work.
while also obscuring the actual political message by making the message seem to be purely criminal.
Can we talk a little bit about the historical context for how conspiracy cases have been used as a tool to crush dissent? Because while it feels like it's happening a lot right now, or in the past five years, in a way that it wasn't before, this also isn't new.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.
