In today’s episode, we discuss a recent court case involving an individual’s expectation of privacy while browsing the Internet.
We begin, however, with the question so many of our listeners wanted to know: Is it legal for Ken Ham to sell his Ark Encounter theme park to his own non-profit ministry in a presumed effort to evade taxes?
In our main segment, the guys break down a recent court case involving search & seizure over the internet. Do you have an expectation of privacy for the stuff you do on your computer? The answer will surprise you.
Next, Yodel Mountain returns with an in-depth examination of what it means to be a “thing of value.”
Finally, we end with an all-new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #33 about search and seizure, coincidentally enough. Remember that you can play along with #TTTBE by retweeting our episode Tweet along with your guess. We’ll release the answer on next Tuesday’s episode along with our favorite entry!
None! Schedule us to appear on your show!
Show Notes & Links
- Here is the article from the Lexington (KY) Herald-Leader on the sale of the Ark Park land.
- This is a link to the U.S. v. Matish decision discussed during the main segment.
- The relevant election law statute is 52 U.S.C. § 30121, which prohibits a foreign national from giving any “thing of value” to a candidate for public office.
- The two cases Andrew discussed interpreting that phrase “thing of value” are U.S. v. Schwartz, 763 F. 2d 1054 (9th Cir. 1985) and U.S. v. Sun-Diamond Growers of California, 941 F. Supp. 1262 (D.D.C. 1996).
Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law
Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs
And email us at email@example.com