Today’s show discusses everyone’s favorite non-issue: whether bigots who bake cakes for a living can discriminate against gays.
We begin with a lightning round of questions taken from the Opening Arguments Facebook Community, which you should definitely join!
In the main segment, we break down Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Next, we explain the recent pronouncement by Donald Trump regarding enforcement of the Magnitsky Act. Are we scaling Yodel Mountain? Listen and find out!
Finally, we end with the answer to Thomas Take the Bar Exam Question #41 regarding direct and circumstantial evidence in the context of a murder investigation and a shoeprint left at the scene. Don’t forget to following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!
None. Have us on your show!
Show Notes & Links
- Here is where you can find the recently-created Opening Arguments Facebook Community, which you should definitely join!
- We answer a question about the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.; we first discussed the CRA back in Episode 61.
- Our next lightning round question is about revenge porn, which we first discussed in Episode 87, and the relevant statute is Cal. PEN § 647(j)(4).
- We end the lightning round with a question about the Apple X phone drawn from this article in Slate.
- You can click here to read the Appellees’ brief in opposition to certiorari in the Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission case.
- This is the text of the Magnitsky Act; and this is the memorandum issued by the Trump White House.
Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law
Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs
And email us at email@example.com