Everyday Injustice

On this week’s episode of Everyday Injustice, host David Greenwald speaks with Maria Foscarinis, a former Wall Street lawyer who left corporate law in the 1980s to become one of the nation’s leading advocates for homeless rights. Foscarinis, who helped found the National Homelessness Law Center, joins the podcast to discuss her forthcoming book, Housing for All: The Fight to End Homelessness in America. The conversation tracks the roots of the modern homelessness crisis, beginning with the Reagan-era cuts to federal housing programs and continuing through today’s growing reliance on criminalization rather than care. Foscarinis emphasizes that the United States has faced multiple waves of homelessness—from the explosion in the 1980s to the fallout from the 2008 foreclosure crisis and now the worsening crisis driven by the commodification of housing. Despite increasing visibility and public discourse around homelessness, she argues that the fundamental issue—access to safe, affordable housing—remains unresolved. “Housing is a human right,” Foscarinis insists, referencing both international law and decades of advocacy. The U.S., she notes, has never fully embraced that principle, instead relying on market-driven solutions that leave millions behind. The episode explores the harmful myths that continue to shape public perception and policy, particularly the idea—originating with Reagan—that homelessness is a choice. Foscarinis addresses the link between homelessness and substance use, cautioning against narratives that blame the individual while ignoring structural failure. She discusses how criminalizing homelessness—through encampment sweeps, arrests, and anti-loitering laws—has become a bipartisan failure, citing the Supreme Court’s Grants Pass decision as a dangerous turning point that has sparked a surge in local anti-homeless ordinances. Finally, Foscarinis shares powerful stories from her book, including that of Danny, a Denver resident who lost limbs after being forced to live outside in the cold. She urges listeners to move beyond charity and become vocal advocates for systemic change: “Use your voice. Tell your representatives: housing is a human right.” As the episode makes clear, solving homelessness isn’t about removing people from view—it’s about creating a society where everyone has a safe place to live.

andrewbrrininstoolaudio by Davis Vanguard

In this episode of Everyday Injustice, we sit down with Emily Salisbury, Director of the Utah Criminal Justice Center and associate professor in the University of Utah’s College of Social Work. Trained as a criminologist with a background in forensic psychology, Salisbury has spent her career focusing on justice-involved women and the unique pathways that lead them into—and out of—the criminal legal system. Her early mentorship in graduate school, she explains, inspired her to pursue gender-responsive research and advocate for policy reforms that meet women where they are. Salisbury breaks down why women are the fastest-growing population in U.S. carceral systems, pointing to decades of tough-on-crime policies, mandatory minimums, and drug sentencing laws that disproportionately ensnare economically marginalized women of color. She underscores how trauma, mental illness, and unhealthy relationships often drive women into the system—noting that traditional correctional strategies, built with men in mind, fail to account for these realities. Salisbury stresses that trauma affects women differently than men, often manifesting as internalized harm rather than outward aggression. A central part of her work has been developing the Women’s Risk Needs Assessment (WRNA), a validated, trauma-informed tool that identifies the specific challenges and strengths of justice-involved women. Unlike traditional assessments, WRNA includes questions on trauma, unhealthy relationships, and personal resilience—offering a more holistic picture of what women need for successful reentry. Salisbury shares how correctional institutions are beginning to embrace gender-responsive probation models and notes the importance of rigorous research, including randomized controlled trials, to ensure these approaches are effective and evidence-based. The conversation concludes with a powerful takeaway: women in the criminal legal system pose far less risk to public safety than men, yet they continue to be over-incarcerated. Salisbury discusses the broader implications of abolitionist thinking, international models of humane incarceration, and the urgent need to invest in early intervention and community-based support. As Salisbury puts it, the key to justice reform isn’t more surveillance or punishment—but understanding, compassion, and policies that treat people with dignity.

In this week’s episode of Everyday Injustice, host David Greenwald speaks with author and researcher Delani Bartlette about her new book, The Dumond Affair, which unpacks a little-known but profoundly disturbing case that exposed the dangerous collision of criminal justice, politics, and conspiracy theory. At the center of the story is Wayne Dumond, a man convicted of raping a 17-year-old Arkansas cheerleader who happened to be distantly related to then-Governor Bill Clinton. Despite a conviction and sentencing by a jury, Dumond became a cause célèbre among evangelical and right-wing circles who claimed he was a political prisoner — a narrative that ultimately led to his release under Governor Mike Huckabee. Bartlette traces how Dumond’s wife and a network of evangelical figures, including a powerful Baptist radio preacher, weaponized conspiracy theories to frame Dumond’s imprisonment as a Clinton vendetta. This pressure campaign found a receptive audience in Huckabee, who had benefited politically from that same religious network. When Huckabee took office, he pushed the parole board to release Dumond — despite protests from law enforcement, prosecutors, and the original victim. Tragically, Dumond went on to rape and murder two women in Missouri, a fact that still haunts the case and raises questions about the cost of political intervention in the justice system. What makes The Dumond Affair so relevant today, Bartlette argues, is its eerie foreshadowing of the disinformation-fueled movements that have come to dominate American politics in the Trump era — from Pizzagate to QAnon to January 6. She connects the dots between 1990s Arkansas, the right-wing media ecosystem that took root there, and the modern conspiracy infrastructure we see now. The same rhetorical strategies and manufactured outrage that once fueled attacks on the Clintons now animate the broader assault on democracy itself. At its core, the story is also a cautionary tale about the erosion of legal standards when ideology eclipses evidence. As Bartlette emphasizes, the justice system failed not because of a lack of process, but because of pressure to subvert it. From the sheriff who kept Dumond’s testicles in a jar, to the media’s complicity in elevating tabloid claims to national prominence, to the chilling aftermath of Dumond’s release, The Dumond Affair offers a compelling narrative of how justice goes awry — and what that means for our politics today.

Today on Everyday Injustice, we revisit a case that has haunted the justice system for nearly half a century—the case of Chief Douglas Stankewitz. Back on the show is attorney Alexandra Cock, who has devoted years to fighting for Chief’s release. Her legal work has uncovered a disturbing pattern of official misconduct, evidentiary irregularities, and racial bias that cast deep doubt on the integrity of the conviction. As someone who was just five years old when Chief went to prison—and is now over 50—I find it unconscionable that this case is still unresolved. We first covered Chief’s habeas hearings in 2024, which raised compelling questions about forensic evidence, trial testimony, and lost or mishandled evidence. Despite these serious concerns, the judge ultimately denied the habeas petition—mischaracterizing key facts and offering little accountability. With the habeas route closed, Chief’s legal team is now turning to a full re-sentencing hearing and two Racial Justice Act motions that may finally open the door to his release. These motions highlight the deeply racialized context of the prosecution and trial, including the removal of the only Native American juror and inflammatory rhetoric used during sentencing. In this episode, Alexandra walks us through the latest legal developments and the broader implications of this case. From questions about prosecutorial overreach to the sheer human toll of decades in solitary confinement, we examine what it means when a justice system refuses to correct its mistakes—even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Alexandra’s insights also touch on Chief’s life behind bars, his extraordinary resilience, and the powerful support network rallying for his freedom. This conversation is not just about one man’s fight for justice—it’s about what kind of society we are willing to be. It asks whether courts are capable of acknowledging past wrongs, and whether political expediency will once again override moral clarity. As we prepare for a critical re-sentencing hearing, this episode serves as both a legal update and a call to action. Because after 47 years in prison, the question isn’t whether Chief deserves freedom—it’s what excuse the system will offer next for denying it.