ellisconversations's podcast

Choosing "The Lesser Evil"

In this episode, the hosts discuss how the phrase "Lesser of two Evils" has been overworked in the election context. It has been applied when one or neither of the choices meets the definition of "evil" but rather the view of the voter that both candidates are flawed in some way. The hosts submit that when faced with such a perceived dilemma, the person should use their vote to cause the least harmful outcome.

Jamil Ellis and his father, retired Federal Magistrate Judge Ronald Louis Ellis, explore the difference between accepting a candidate's flaws and overlooking the consequences of an election. Drawing on the history of slavery, discrimination in Northern states, and the struggle for integrated schools, they consider how people have pursued greater freedom and opportunity even when the available choices were imperfect.

The conversation examines what it means to vote for an entire governing ecosystem—including judicial appointments, agency leadership, party platforms, and legislative priorities. The hosts also discuss how segregation and the suppression of history limit our understanding of one another, and why those divisions matter when evaluating political claims.

They bring the discussion back to the human consequences of policy: immigration enforcement's impact on families, projected losses of health insurance and associated risks to life, and estimates of preventable deaths resulting from cuts to USAID. Throughout, they argue that voting and holding elected officials accountable belong together. Choosing the least harmful outcome does not end the work of demanding something better.

Resources promised in the episode

1. Leon F. Litwack, North of Slavery: The Negro in the Free States. The book Judge Ellis references about discrimination against free Black Americans in the North before the Civil War. University of Chicago Press — book page press.uchicago.edu

2. Previous Ellis Conversations episode on Project 2025 and party platforms. The strongest match is "The Company Trump Keeps: From David Duke to The Proud Boys to Project 2025 – Intended Consequences" (July 11, 2024). Its notes include both Project 2025 material and party-platform links. Listen on Apple Podcasts Apple Podcasts Additional documents for listeners:

   • Project 2025: Mandate for Leadership — full PDF
   • 2024 Democratic Party platform
   • 2024 Republican Party platform

   Project 2025 is a Heritage-led policy blueprint, separate from the Republican Party's official platform. static.heritage.org

3. Zohran Mamdani's video about Italian immigrants in New York. This appears to be the piece mentioned: an Italian Heritage Month video recognizing immigrants' contributions and Vito Marcantonio's legacy. Watch the video on the NYC Mayor's Facebook page facebook.com

4. Ford Pinto litigation and the value placed on human life. The relevant case is Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co. (1981), addressing the Pinto's fuel-system design, a fatal fire, and punitive damages. Read the court opinion law.justia.com

5. School integration: Sheff v. O'Neill

   The landmark Connecticut school-desegregation case discussed in the episode challenged racial and economic isolation in Hartford-area public schools. The 1996 decision established the state's obligation to address segregation and unequal educational opportunity. legaldefensefund.substack.com

   • Legal Defense Fund: Thirty years after Sheff v. O'Neill—community reflections and continuing impact
   • Legal Defense Fund: Case background and desegregation remedies
   • Connecticut Supreme Court: Read the 1996 decision

6. Voting information for the upcoming election. For NYC listeners, Election Day is Tuesday, November 3, 2026, with polls open 6 a.m.–9 p.m. Early voting runs October 24–November 1. NYC Board of Elections — election information Early voting information Request an early-mail or absentee ballot vote.nyc

Sources supporting the statistics and other references

1. ICE street arrests and Latino communities. THE CITY's investigation identified 430 NYC-area street arrests, more than 93% involving Latinos, through court challenges. This describes that investigation's sample, rather than all ICE arrests. Read the investigation The City Reporter

2. Deaths in immigration detention. Reuters documented 50 deaths since January 2025 as of June 2026, and found that the population-adjusted death rate had more than doubled. Label the figure with its reporting date. Reuters — detention mortality investigation www.reuters.com

3. Projected increases in uninsured people. Georgetown summarizes CBO's estimates: 5.2 million additional uninsured people in 2027 and 10 million in 2034 due to the 2025 reconciliation law. Georgetown — CBO coverage estimates Center For Children and Families

4. Potential deaths associated with insurance losses. The published analysis estimated 16,642 additional annual deaths for 7.6 million additional uninsured people under an earlier proposal. Applying the same rate to 10 million produces approximately 22,000 annual deaths. The show notes should identify this as an extrapolation, not a CBO mortality estimate. Annals of Internal Medicine study — abstract pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

5. USAID: estimated deaths over one year. NPR reporting carried by KPBS quotes Brooke Nichols' estimate of more than 700,000 deaths, including more than half a million children. This is a modeled estimate, not an individually verified death count. NPR/KPBS — reporting and individual cases KPBS Public Media

6. USAID: projected deaths through 2030. The Lancet study projected approximately 14 million additional deaths, including 4.5 million children under five, under sustained steep defunding. This overlaps with the one-year estimate; the figures should not be added together. The Lancet study — abstract pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

7. Sam Altman's comments about accepting AI-related harms. I found reporting matching the remarks paraphrased in the episode. The Verge — October 5, 2026 theverge.com

Voting in NYC: Make Your Plan!

You have three ways to vote: early in person, by mail, or in person on Election Day. Use the official resources below to check your registration, find your assigned polling place, and make a plan.

Check your registration

The voter-registration deadline is Saturday, October 24, 2026. Mailed registration applications must be received by that date, not simply postmarked. New York State Board of ...

• Check your voter registration
• Learn how to register

1. Vote early in person: October 24–November 1

Vote at your assigned early voting location, which may differ from your Election Day location.

Date Hours Saturday, October 24 9 a.m.–5 p.m. Sunday, October 25 9 a.m.–5 p.m. Monday, October 26 9 a.m.–5 p.m. Tuesday, October 27 10 a.m.–8 p.m. Wednesday, October 28 10 a.m.–8 p.m. Thursday, October 29 8 a.m.–4 p.m. Friday, October 30 9 a.m.–5 p.m. Saturday, October 31 9 a.m.–5 p.m. Sunday, November 1 9 a.m.–5 p.m.

Find your assigned early voting site · Official early voting information NYC Votes

2. Vote by mail: No excuse required

Any registered voter can request an early mail ballot. Absentee ballots also remain available for voters who meet the qualifying conditions. NYC Board of Elections

• October 24: Deadline for the Board of Elections to receive a ballot request online or by mail.
• November 2: Last day to request a ballot in person at your county Board of Elections office.
• November 3: Last day to postmark your completed ballot or deliver it in person by 9 p.m. vote.nyc

Follow the ballot instructions carefully, sign and date the security envelope, and seal both envelopes. Return postage is prepaid. You can also deliver your completed ballot to your county Board of Elections office or a polling place in your county during voting hours. Mail it early: the State Board of Elections lists November 10 as the receipt deadline for ballots postmarked by Election Day. nycvotes.org

• Request an early mail ballot
• Mail and absentee ballot instructions
• Request an accessible ballot
• Track your ballot

Already requested a mail ballot but want to vote in person? You will need to use an affidavit ballot, rather than a voting machine. Ask a poll worker for assistance. nycvotes.org

3. Vote on Election Day: Tuesday, November 3

Polls are open 6 a.m.–9 p.m. Vote at your assigned Election Day polling place, and check the location before heading out. vote.nyc

• Find your Election Day polling place and sample ballot
• Official 2026 general election information

Questions or assistance?

Visit the NYC Board of Elections or NYC Votes, or call 1-866-VOTE-NYC (1-866-868-3692). nycvotes.org

Dates checked October 16, 2026. Check the official sites for updates before voting.

Original Intent: How traditionally excluded people are targeted for removal when they show up in "the wrong space." In this episode, the Hosts discuss the case of Jason Arday and why history suggests that the intense scrutiny and media coverage he faced may not be simply a concern about qualifications, or lack thereof.

In March 2023, Jason Arday made history as the youngest Black person ever appointed to a professorship at the University of Cambridge. Celebrated for an extraordinary journey that took him to one of the world's most prestigious universities, Arday became a highly visible symbol of possibility, inclusion, and institutional change.

Three years later, his career at Cambridge ended amid allegations of misconduct, intense media scrutiny, and a public campaign that raised difficult questions extending far beyond the actions of one professor.

In this episode of Ellis Conversations, Jamil Ellis and retired Federal Magistrate Judge Ronald Ellis examine the controversy surrounding Arday while placing it within a much larger struggle over race, academic authority, mental health, DEI, and who is permitted to occupy elite institutions. They consider how allegations should be investigated and taken seriously without ignoring the racialized machinery through which certain individuals are selected, amplified, and transformed into public symbols of institutional failure.

The conversation then turns toward an even more unsettling development: the reemergence of eugenic thinking within influential corners of technology, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and transhumanism. Ideas once expressed through pseudoscientific racial hierarchies are increasingly repackaged through the language of intelligence, optimization, genetics, technological progress, and humanity's supposed future.

What happens when the people designing powerful technologies carry deeply unequal beliefs about whose intelligence matters, whose lives have value, and who deserves to shape the future? How do those beliefs become embedded in datasets, algorithms, institutions, and public policy? And when does technological optimism become a justification for deciding that some people should flourish while others may be abandoned?

This episode is not simply about whether Jason Arday made mistakes. It is about the institutions and ideological forces surrounding his rise and fall—and about the danger of treating racism, white supremacy, and eugenics as historical relics when they are being actively reconstructed for the age of AI.

Related Episodes:

Claudine Gay - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/claudine-gay-the-latest-victim-in-the-debate-over/id1485019282?i=1000640905093

Eugenics - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/self-evident-lies-eugenics-social-policy-an/id1485019282?i=1000459663353

Topics include: Jason Arday, Cambridge University, race and academic power, media double standards, mental health, attacks on DEI, race science, modern eugenics, artificial intelligence, transhumanism, technological elitism, algorithmic bias, and the struggle over who gets to define humanity's future.

The Trump administration has opened a new front in its campaign against diversity, equity, and inclusion: the federal tax code.

In this mini episode of Ellis Conversations, Jamil Ellis and retired Federal Magistrate Judge Ronald Ellis respond to a proposed Treasury Department and IRS rule that could strip private schools, colleges, and universities of their tax-exempt status if they operate admissions, scholarship, financial-aid, or student-support programs that consider race.

They examine whether the executive branch should have the authority to redefine which educational institutions qualify for tax exemption, the administration's selective focus on programs supporting historically excluded communities, and its apparent lack of concern about preferences such as legacy admissions.

They also discuss the proposal's potentially chilling effect. Even if courts ultimately block the rule, smaller colleges and educational institutions may dismantle effective diversity programs simply to avoid legal and financial risk.

This is not merely a debate about DEI. It is a struggle over who educational institutions are permitted to help—and who the government believes deserves access, opportunity, and support.

In this episode of Ellis Conversations, Jamil Ellis and retired Federal Magistrate Judge Hon. Ronald L. Ellis continue their two-part conversation on employment discrimination, civil-rights enforcement, and the future of equal opportunity.

Part One looked at the history of employment discrimination law, disparate impact, and the role of the EEOC, Justice Department, courts, and civil-rights lawyers in building protections for workers. In Part Two, the conversation turns to a newer and less visible frontier: algorithmic hiring systems.

Jamil and Judge Ellis discuss what happens when software platforms, recruiting tools, and AI-driven screening systems sit between job applicants and employers. If these systems score, sort, rank, or filter applicants before a human being ever sees them, are they simply neutral tools — or are they powerful gatekeepers that must be accountable under civil-rights law?

The episode focuses on the legal and moral questions raised by cases like Mobley v. Workday, where plaintiffs allege that algorithmic hiring tools can reproduce bias based on race, age, and disability. Jamil and Judge Ellis explore why machine-learning systems trained on past employment patterns may risk automating old discrimination in new forms, and why transparency, data, state-level regulation, and accountability for technology middlemen may become essential civil-rights issues.

At the heart of the episode is a simple question: Civil-rights law cannot stop at the edge of the algorithm. If technology helps decide who gets opportunity, who makes sure the technology is fair?

Related Ellis Conversations Episodes

This episode builds on a longer Ellis Conversations thread about civil rights, courts, democracy, and the systems that decide who gets full access to opportunity.

Related episodes:

"In Sheep's Clothing: When facially neutral policies and practices mask intentional discrimination" A direct companion to this episode. We discuss employment discrimination, disparate impact, and why neutral-looking rules can still produce unequal outcomes. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/in-sheeps-clothing-when-facially-neutral-policies-and/id1485019282?i=1000776614155

"The American Dream at 250" Connects the AI accountability conversation to the larger question of who gets access to the American promise. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-american-dream-at-250/id1485019282?i=1000775453951

"Loving Day, The Warren Court, The rights they want to erase" Looks at the Warren Court's civil-rights legacy and today's rollback of protections — background for why new AI systems need civil-rights accountability. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/loving-day-the-warren-court-the-rights-they-want-to-erase/id1485019282?i=1000712580199

"Deliberate, But No Speed" Explores how rights can exist on paper while enforcement is delayed, narrowed, or resisted — a key theme in thinking about algorithmic discrimination. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/deliberate-but-no-speed-how-supreme-court-rulings-have/id1485019282?i=1000710549539

"Claudine Gay: The Latest Victim in the Debate over DEI, Affirmative Action, and Meritocracy" Connects to how claims of "merit" and "neutrality" can ignore historical exclusion — the same concern raised by AI hiring tools marketed as objective. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/claudine-gay-the-latest-victim-in-the-debate-over/id1485019282?i=1000641006303

Full Ellis Conversations archive: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ellisconversationss-podcast/id1485019282

In this episode of Ellis Conversations, Jamil Ellis and retired Federal Magistrate Judge Hon. Ronald L. Ellis begin a two-part conversation on employment discrimination, civil-rights enforcement, and the future of equal opportunity in America.

Prompted by recent reporting on the Trump administration's retreat from discrimination enforcement — including the Justice Department, EEOC, and other federal agencies stepping back from disparate-impact cases — Jamil asks Judge Ellis to help explain how we got the workplace protections we have today, why they matter, and what may be lost when government stops enforcing them.

This conversation is especially personal and historically grounded because before joining the federal bench, Judge Ellis worked at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund on employment discrimination cases. Together, father and son discuss how discrimination has operated through race, gender, hiring tests, workplace rules, and supposedly "neutral" policies — and why disparate impact became such an important tool for identifying discrimination that does not always announce itself openly.

This episode also continues themes from recent Ellis Conversations episodes on birthright citizenship, Temporary Protected Status, immigration, race, and the courts. Across these conversations, the question remains: when long-standing protections are weakened, what happens to the promise of equal justice?

Listen to Ellis Conversations on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ellisconversationss-podcast/id1485019282

Part Two preview: In the next episode, Jamil and Judge Ellis turn to AI and hiring technology, including the Workday lawsuit, and ask what happens when discrimination is embedded inside software before a human ever sees an application.

In this episode, the Hosts discuss America's struggle to make real the promise of equality embodied in its founding documents depite periodic efforts to restrict who should be able to live that dream.

Supreme Court TPS Ruling

In this episode of Ellis Conversations, co-host Jamil Ellis sits down again with his father, retired federal magistrate Judge Ronald Ellis, to mark Loving Day — the anniversary of Loving v. Virginia, the 1967 Supreme Court case that struck down bans on interracial marriage.

What starts as a reflection on Loving Day quickly becomes a powerful and wide-ranging discussion about:

• How distorted historical narratives fuel today's rollback of civil rights
• Why anti-DEI forces rely on historical erasure
• The forgotten legal barriers against women
• The dangerous nostalgia embedded in the "Make America Great Again" slogan
• A look at Project 2025, the Federalist Society, and how today's Supreme Court is targeting many of the Warren Court's civil rights decisions

From All in the Family to Sidney Poitier, from welfare state debates to voting rights, Judge Ellis breaks down the legal and cultural legacy at stake.

Relevant Links & Resources:

• Loving v. Virginia (1967) https://www.oyez.org/cases/1966/395

• Warren Court Key Decisions Brown v. Board (1954): https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/347us483 Gideon v. Wainwright (1963): https://www.oyez.org/cases/1962/155 Miranda v. Arizona (1966): https://www.oyez.org/cases/1965/759 Griswold v. Connecticut (1965): https://www.oyez.org/cases/1964/496 Engel v. Vitale (1962): https://www.oyez.org/cases/1961/468 Tinker v. Des Moines (1969): https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/21

• Project 2025: https://www.project2025.org

• Federalist Society: https://fedsoc.org

• All In The Family theme reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_in_the_Family

The hosts discuss how desegregation under Brown was hampered in schools by a policy of "all deliberate speed" where the speed was often zero. In contrast, and despite the fact that in large portions of the nation education is separate and unequal, the Trump administration has begun an "all speed ahead" policy of eliminating decrees which contained desegregation requirements'.

https://www.axios.com/2025/05/02/doj-decades-old-school-desegregation-louisiana

In this episode of Ellis Conversations, co-host Jamil Ellis and his father, retired federal magistrate Judge Ronald Ellis, reflect on the 71st anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education—not just the 1954 decision, but its overlooked 1955 follow-up. They explore the legal and societal impacts of desegregation mandates, the resistance that followed, and how today's rollback of civil rights enforcement—particularly around school desegregation—echoes familiar patterns.

With real-life stories, including Ruby Bridges and Prince Edward County's school closures, the conversation traces decades of policy evolution—from Milliken v. Bradley to Roberts Court rulings that undermine systemic remedies for segregation. The episode also offers generational perspectives on optimism, protest, and the need for youth leadership in safeguarding educational equity.

👉 If you're concerned about the dismantling of civil rights protections in education and policing—or wondering how to equip young people to carry the legacy forward—this one's for you.

🔗 Relevant Links & References:

• Brown v. Board of Education (1954 & 1955 decisions) https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/347us483 https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/349us294

• Milliken v. Bradley (1974) https://www.oyez.org/cases/1973/73-434

• Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007) https://www.oyez.org/cases/2006/05-908

• Ruby Bridges Foundation https://rubybridges.foundation

• Shelby County v. Holder (2013 Voting Rights Act decision) https://www.oyez.org/cases/2012/12-96

• American Psychological Association – Implicit Bias https://www.apa.org/ed/university/implicit-bias

• The Heritage Foundation's "Project 2025" (mentioned indirectly) https://www.project2025.org

In this episode, the hosts discuss Project 2025 and its potential impact in a Donald Trump administration.

Heritage Foundation and Trump https://www.heritage.org/impact/trump-administration-embraces-heritage-foundation-policy-recommendations Biden's Judicial Appointments https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/12/04/most-of-bidens-appointed-judges-to-date-are-women-racial-or-ethnic-minorities-a-first-for-any-president/ Trump bankruptcies https://bankruptcy-toledo.com/fact-checking-donald-trump-has-filed-bankruptcy-six-times/ The Nation on the Heirtage Foundation Project 2025 https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/will-the-heritage-foundations-project-2025-turn-trumpism-into-a-governing-agenda/ Trump Administration people at Heritage https://www.heritage.org/impact/four-trump-cabinet-members-now-call-heritage-home Trump on baby Tiffany's body. https://youtu.be/nqVgmwkX7oA Platforms Republican 2016 platform - https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/2016-republican-party-platform Democrat 2020 platform - https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/2020-democratic-party-platform Related episodes Voting is a Fundamental Right: Exercise It; You'll Make It Stronger The Hands That Rock The Cradle: Donald Trump, the Supreme Court, and the Federalist Society.

In this episode, the hosts begin a series of discussions on the historical significance of voting, efforts to prevent some groups from voting, and why you should exercise your right to vote even if you don't like the choices. Do what you can, where you are, with what you have.

Southern Strategy - In American politics, the Southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.

Voter ID by State https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_identification_laws_by_state Student ID to Vote https://www.campusvoteproject.org/student-id-as-voter-id