Category: Podcast

Today’s episode features a full-length interview with the co-founder of The Satanic Temple, Lucien Greaves.   This episode is part of a two-part crossover with Episode 119 of Serious Inquiries Only.  In this episode, we talk about TST’s lawsuit challenging Missouri’s abortion law and other issues at the forefront of church-state separation.

After that, we end with the answer to Thomas (and Lucien!) Take the Bar Exam Question #62, a fiendishly difficult question about the Statute of Frauds.  Don’t forget to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Recent Appearances

None.  Have us on your show!

Show Notes & Links

1. Don’t forget to check out Episode 119 of Serious Inquiries Only featuring Jex Blackmore!
2. We first discussed TST’s lawsuit challenging the Missouri abortion law way back in Episode 7 and Episode 8!
3.  You can follow the link to the January 23, 2018 oral arguments in Doe v. Greitens by clicking here.
4. Doe’s brief can be found here, and this is the State of Missouri’s response.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download

In this “lightning round” episode, Andrew tackles more than the typical three stories we cover on the show.  How much more??  Listen and find out!

Potential topics include:  the budget showdown and sequestration, the recent Supreme Court rulings on gerrymandering, the Nunes memo, the Federal Reserve, stock market, and Wells Fargo fraud, and … possibly even more??

Finally, we end with an all-new Thomas (and Lucien!) Take the Bar Exam #62 involving the statute of frauds.  Remember that you can play along with #TTTBE by retweeting our episode on Twitter or sharing it on Facebook along with your guess.  We’ll release the answer on next Tuesday’s episode along with our favorite entry!

Recent Appearances

None!  Have us on your show!

Show Notes & Links

1. You can read all 652 pages of the proposed budget deal here.
2. The Pennsylvania redistricting case is League of Women Voters v. Pennsylvania, 159 MM 2017.
3. We discussed the North Carolina gerrymandering decision in Episode 138; the Supreme Court’s brief order staying that decision is here.
4. And, of course, you’ll want to review the 2008 Powerpoint and 2010 “Snidely  Whiplash” REDMAP Powerpoint.
5. This is the full text of the Nunes memo.  We discussed FISA courts in depth in Episode 106, which covered 50 U.S.C. § 1805, the authorizing legislation.
6. Finally, you can read the Federal Reserve’s cease-and-desist against Wells Fargo; the enabling legislation is 12 U.S.C. § 1818 et seq.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download

Today’s episode features a full-length interview with former naturopath turned whistleblower Britt Marie Hermes.  We talk about her amazing career and the recent defamation lawsuit filed against her under German law.

After that, we answer a question from Very Special Listener Lydia S. about a viral tweet suggesting that Native Americans grant honorary citizenship to DACA enrolees.

And, as always, we end with the answer to Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #61, the end of our three-part Dungeons & Dragons question about ogres, assault, trespass,  electrical storms, and deadly arrows.  Don’t forget to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Recent Appearances

None.  Have us on your show!

Show Notes & Links

1. Here’s a link to the German defamation law, which begins at section 185.
2. You should check out Britt Hermes’s excellent blog, Naturopathic Diaries.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download

If you want football-themed Opening Arguments, check out Episode 57 and Episode 58, which tell the tale of how one Donald J. Trump destroyed the USFL.  Everyone else can enjoy today’s sports-free episode, which begins with a discussion of California SB 183 and so-called “sanctuary cities” in light of the State of the Union.

In the main segment, Andrew and Thomas break down news about a proposed Department of Labor rule regarding the “tip credit.”

After that, the guys discuss yesterday’s landmark opinion holding the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau constitutional.

Finally, we end with our third Dungeons & Dragons-themed Thomas Takes the Bar Exam (Question #61) involving lightning, wildfires, an experienced woodsman, and possible assault by an errant crossbow bolt.  Remember that you can play along with #TTTBE by retweeting our episode on Twitter or sharing it on Facebook along with your guess.  We’ll release the answer on next Tuesday’s episode along with our favorite entry!

Recent Appearances

None!  Have us on your show!

Show Notes & Links

1. You can read the text of Cal. SB 183 here.
2. This is the Bloomberg News article on the Trump DOL burying the factfinding report; here is a link to the NPRM.
3. Finally, you can read PHH Corp. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the D.C. Circuit opinion discussed during the “C” segment.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download

Today’s episode features a deep dive into two recently-filed lawsuits on behalf of same-sex couples where the government literally wants to break up their families.  And don’t forget to tune in for our LIVE Q&A this Wednesday, 1/31, at 7 pm EST / 4 pm Pacific.

First, though we return to the wild and wacky world of sovereign citizens by examining a recent bill introduced in the New Hampshire state legislature.  Does it really threaten cities in New Hampshire with a $10,000 fine if they don’t subscribe to sovereign citizen nonsense?  Listen and find out!

In the main segment, we cover the Blixt and Dvash-Banks lawsuits.  Did INS really make a determination that one twin is a U.S. citizen and the other isn’t?  The answer (yes) probably won’t surprise you.

After that, we answer a listener question about whether the Supreme Court is as political as it seems.

And, as always, we end with the answer to Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #60 about trespass, signs, electrical storms, and deadly arrows.  Don’t forget to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Recent Appearances

None.  Have us on your show!

Show Notes & Links

1. Get your Q&A Questions in and vote for your favorites!
2. You can read the full text of New Hampshire HB 1653 here, and, if you’re not up on your sovereign citizen lingo, be sure to check out LAM 13 (“Meet Your Strawman”).
3. Oh, and don’t forget to check out Wes Jensen’s amazing sovereign citizen wackiness (“Hiding Behind the BAR“) if you want to know the secrets they won’t tell you.
4. The 14th Amendment’s birth citizenship clause is implemented by 8 U.S.C. § 1401, and then further interpreted by 7 FAM 1140, Appendix E.
5. Finally, here’s the NPR article on Gorsuch voting with Thomas 100% of the time.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download

Today’s episode features a deep dive into our nation’s opioid crisis.

First, the guys take a look at a recent bad court thingy filed by Paul Manafort’s lawyers in connection with his criminal prosecution.  What does it mean?  Listen and find out!

In the main segment, Andrew and Thomas break down the just-released Senate Subcommittee Report on illegal opioid use in this country and discuss how an obscure 1874 treaty organization affects international drug trafficking.  You won’t want to miss it!

After the main segment, Andrew answers a question from one of our youngest listeners, high school sophmore Brian about a recent free speech case at the University of Alabama.  You may be surprised at the answer!

Finally, we end with our second of three Middle Earth-themed Thomas Takes the Bar Exam (Question #60) involving lightning, wildfires, an experienced woodsman, and an errant crossbow bolt.  Remember that you can play along with #TTTBE by retweeting our episode on Twitter or sharing it on Facebook along with your guess.  We’ll release the answer on next Tuesday’s episode along with our favorite entry!

Recent Appearances

None!  Have us on your show!

Show Notes & Links

1. Manafort’s accidentally-included legal memo can be found here.
2. You can hear Deborah Smith and Zach Law discuss opioids here.
3. This is the Senate Subcommittee Report on Opioid Interdiction, and this is the text of SB 708.
4. Finally, here’s a link to Papish v. Board of Curators, 410 U.S. 667 (1973), the case we discussed in answering Brian’s question.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download

Today’s episode features a full-length interview with Tony DiFatta, accountant to the podcasting stars.  He answers your questions about the 2017 omnibus tax bill that were posted in this Patreon thread.

First, though, we take a look at whether Stormy Daniels can be silenced (or sued) because of the NDA she presumably signed with the Trump organization.

After a deep dive into the new tax bill, we we end with the answer to Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #59 about trespass, signs, electrical storms, and deadly arrows.  Don’t forget to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Recent Appearances

None.  Have us on your show!

Show Notes & Links

1. We first discussed Trump’s NDA in Episode 137; you can read the letter quoting the NDA here.
2. Click here to find out more about Tony D.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download

Today’s episode features a deep dive in the latest legal news surrounding the DACA program.

First, the guys tackle a listener question regarding the difference between the James Damore case against Google and Colin Kaepernick’s grievance against the NFL.  Are the two cases similar?

After the main segment, Andrew walks us through a case that was just argued before the Supreme Court, McCoy v. Louisiana, in which a lawyer conceded his client’s guilt during a capital murder trial over the client’s objections.

Finally, we end with an all-new Game of Thrones-themed Thomas Takes the Bar Exam (Question #59) involving lightning, wildfires, an experienced woodsman, and an errant crossbow bolt.  Remember that you can play along with #TTTBE by retweeting our episode on Twitter or sharing it on Facebook along with your guess.  We’ll release the answer on next Tuesday’s episode along with our favorite entry!

Recent Appearances

Andrew was a guest on This Week In News With Kevin and Benedict, talking felon voting rights; give it a listen!

Show Notes & Links

1. We discussed the James Damore lawsuit on Episode 111 of Serious Inquiries Only, and the Kaepernick grievance on OA Episode 115.
2. The Sherman Antitrust Act begins at 15 U.S.C. § 1.
3. We first discussed the DACA recission on Episode 102.
4. You can read the District Court decision on DACA here.
5. The primary case we discussed in the assistance of counsel section was Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975).

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download

Today’s episode features a full-length interview with the one and only Cara Santa Maria!

First, though, we pore through the Fusion GPS testimony that was leaked by Sen. Dianne Feinstein and we look at a companion defamation lawsuit filed by one of Trump’s lawyers, Michael Cohen, against Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson.  Click here to read the Cohen Complaint.  Andrew also sneakily uses this as an excuse to teach us all about federal motions to dismiss and the Iqbal and Twombly cases.

Next, we talk to Cara, who talks skepticism, the law, and science education with us.

Finally, we end with the answer to Thomas and CaraTake the Bar Exam Question #58 about breach of contract for the hottest tech gadget of 1987, the Walk-n-Talkman.  Don’t forget to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Recent Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on Episode 111 of Serious Inquiries Only, discussing the James Damore lawsuit against Google, as well as This Week In News With Kevin and Benedict discussing felon voting rights.  Check ’em out!

Show Notes & Links

1. You’ll want to check out Michael Wolff’s response to the Trump cease-and-desist letter we made fun of back in Episode 137.
2. You can read the Fusion GPS testimony by clicking here.
3. Finally, you should go check out Cara Santa Maria’s website for all things Cara!

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download

Today’s episode tackles a number of breaking legal issues.

First, the guys break down the recent memorandum by Attorney General Jeff Sessions on marijuana.  What does this mean for the average recreational user in a state where pot is legal, like California?  Listen and find out!

Next, Andrew walks us through the recent decision by a three-judge panel in North Carolina invalidating that state’s electoral districts.

After that, the guys tackle a question from listener Jeremy Feldman about Net Neutrality and the Congressional Review Act.

Finally, we end with an all-new Thomas (and Cara Santa Maria!) Take the Bar Exam Question #58 about the hottest new gadget, the Mitsubishi Walk-and-Talkman!  Remember that you can play along with #TTTBE by retweeting our episode on Twitter or sharing it on Facebook along with your guess.  We’ll release the answer on next Tuesday’s episode along with our favorite entry!

Recent Appearances

Andrew was a guest on This Week In News With Kevin and Benedict, talking felon voting rights; give it a listen!

Show Notes & Links

1. The Controlled Substances Act is 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.
2. You can read the Cole Memo here, and then the Sessions Memo rescinding it.
3. This is the US Attorney’s Manual discussed on the show.
4. We first discussed gerrymandering back in OA 54, and then again in OA 72 and OA 80.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download