Today’s episode takes a deep dive into the just-filed briefs in the Trump v. Mazars litigation pending before the Supreme Court regarding the legitimacy of the House’s subpoenas for Trump’s tax returns. Is the law on the House’s side? (Yes, yes it is.) Are we confident that the Supreme Court will rule the right way in a case this bad? (Maybe?) In any event, you’ll want to listen!
Announcements
- Don’t forget our YouTube Live Q&A this Sunday, March 1, at 1:30 pm Eastern / 10:30 am Pacific!
- You still have two days to register for Voter Protection Law School Boot Camp!
We begin with an Andrew Was Wrong(-ish) from our good friend Randall Eliason on the actual frequency of below-guidelines sentences in light of Roger Stone’s downward variance.
Then it’s time for a deep dive into Mazars v. Trump, where we look at the briefs filed by the parties and evaluate the arguments made by the Trump administration that the subpoenas issued by the House are invalid. How bad are these arguments? They’re bad.
Then, it’s time to tackle the recent defamation lawsuit filed by the Trump campaign against the New York Times regarding a March 2019 op-ed by Max Frankel, in which Mr. Frankel argued that the campaign didn’t need to coordinate with Russia to benefit from foreign assistance. Does this pave the way for really good discovery? (No.)
After all that, it’s time for a brand-new #T3BE involving a law prohibiting providing assistance to undocumented aliens. Can Thomas start a new winning streak? Listen and find out. And, of course, you can always play along on social media by using the hashtag #T3BE!
Appearances
None! If you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.
Show Notes & Links
- Remember to check out our YouTube Channel !
- If you’re thinking about Democratic Voter Protection Law School Bootcamp, check out the flyer and then apply online.
- n the opening segment, Andrew references the U.S. Sentencing Commission (2018) report on sentences.
- in Mazars v. Trump, check out the President’s Jay Sekulow-penned brief as well as the just-filed response by the House of Representatives. You can also read the Franchise Tax Bd. v. Hyatt (2019) decision.
- Finally, check out the Trump Campaign v. New York Times defamation lawsuit.
-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law
-Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs
-Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/, and don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!
-For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed! @oawiki
-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!
Download Link
One Reply to “OA364: Will The Supreme Court Shield Trump’s Taxes? (No.)”