OA151: Equal Access, the Americans With Disabilities Act, and HR 620

Today’s episode takes a look at HR 620.  What does it mean, and why does Congress want to make changes to one of the most successful, bipartisan, and beloved pieces of legislation in the past 30 years?

First, though, the guys update  break down a recent decision from the Eastern District of New York also enjoining Trump’s rescission of DACA.  Why did a second court block Trump’s order?  Listen and find out!

During the main segment, Andrew walks us through the history of the Americans with Disabilities Act and what restrictions HR 620 would impose on would-be plaintiffs.  Is it as bad as people are saying?  (Hint:  yes.)

After that,  we answer a somewhat off-the-wall question from listener Mark Lunn that’s a follow-up to Episode 147 with Lucien Greaves.

Finally, we end with the answer to Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #64 about dog law, accidental trespass, and… well, you’ll just have to listen.  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 show up for the monthly Q&A this Wednesday, February 28th, at 8:30 pm Eastern / 5:30 pm Pacific.  You can submit your questions here.
  2. We covered the first court decision enjoining Trump’s order on DACA in Episode 140.  You can read the second (New York) decision here.
  3. The relevant provision of the ADA modified by HR 620 is 42 U.S.C. § 12188.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

Don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com


Direct Download

OA150: Janus, The Angry Roman God Of Doorways (And Labor Law?)

In this fast-breaking episode, Thomas and Andrew preview a significant labor case scheduled for oral argument before the Supreme Court this coming Monday, Janus v. AFSCME.  You’ll know all about it before the news breaks!

In the initial segment, “Andrew Was Wrong” returns with listener criticism over our repetition of the common media statement that Parkland was the “18th” school shooting of 2018.

After that, Andrew walks us through Janus v. AFSCME and its implications on the future of unions.

Next, the guys revisit ex-Google employee James Damore and discuss the significance of a recent memorandum issued by the National Labor Relations Board regarding his termination.  Is The Most Important Lawsuit In The History of Western Civilization still on track?  Listen and find out.

Finally, we end with an all-new TTTBE #64 about criminal dog law.  You won’t want to miss it!  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

Check out the NEW PODCAST created by our very own Thomas Smith and friend-of-the-show Aaron Rabi, “Philosophers in Space.”  You’ll be glad you did!

Show Notes & Links

  1. Janus is, in fact, the angry god of doorways.
  2. We covered the Parkland school shooting in Episode 148.
  3. This is the Washington Post article critical of the “Everytown for Gun Safety” statistics, and here is a link to Everytown’s actual database of incidents.  Judge for yourself!
  4. Here is Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, 431 U.S. 209 (1977), discussed extensively during the show.
  5. You can read the NLRB memo advising dismissal here.
  6. We covered the (still-pending) James Damore lawsuit on Episode 111 of Serious Inquiries Only.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

Don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com


Direct Download

OA149: Russian Indictments & Utah Silence (feat. Bryce Blankenagel)

Today’s emergency episode breaks down the indictments issued in the Mueller probe on Friday, focusing on the shadowy, Putin-funded Internet Research Agency.  What does this mean in terms of Yodel Mountain?  Listen and find out!

After that, we have a lengthy interview with friend of the show Bryce Blankenagel of the Naked Mormonism podcast.  Bryce comes on the show to break down the Rob Porter scandal, an innocuous-sounding bill before the Utah state legislature, and the puppet-mastery of the Mormon Church of all things political in that state.

After that, we end with the answer to Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #63, another very difficult question, this one about hearsay.  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

Check out the NEW PODCAST created by our very own Thomas Smith and friend-of-the-show Aaron Rabi, “Philosophers in Space.”  You’ll be glad you did!

Also, Andrew was just a guest on Episode 6 of the Wayward Willis Podcast — give it a listen.

Show Notes & Links

  1. The case referenced in the A segment is United States v. Yousef, 327 F.3d 56 (2003).
  2. This is the text of Utah HB 330, and this is the article Bryce referenced during the show.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

Don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com


Direct Download

OA148: The Parkland Massacre

In this emotional episode, Thomas and Andrew begin by discussing the recent school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas HS in Parkland, Florida.

After that, the guys break down the recent settlement between Waymo (the Google-backed automotive company) and Uber regarding allegations of stolen trade secrets in the nascent self-driving car industry.

Then, Andrew updates us on the state of gerrymandering litigation in Pennsylvania and before the Supreme Court.

Finally, we end with an all-new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam #63 about hearsay.  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 just a guest on Episode 6 of the Wayward Willis Podcast — give it a listen!

Show Notes & Links

  1. We discussed a modest proposal for gun control in Episode 110., and the 1994 Omnibus Crime Bill in Episode 95.
  2. Andrew quoted from this CNN article when referencing teacher Melissa Falkowski; from this Washington Post article about Colt’s decision to suspend sales of the AR-15 in 1989, and from this blog post on “The Firearm Blog” by the AR-15’s designer, Jim Sullivan.
  3. California’s Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989 can be found at California Penal Code § 30150 et seq.
  4. This is the Waymo v. Uber lawsuit, and here is the link where you can view the Powerpoint used during the REAL OPENING STATEMENTS by Waymo’s attorneys.
  5. Finally, we last discussed gerrymandering in Pennsylvania and elsewhere way back in Episode 146.  If you’re curious, this is what MD-6 looks like today, and this is what it looked like before the 2011 redistricting.

Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

Don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Direct Download

OA147: The Satanic Temple (featuring Lucien Greaves)

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

OA146: Clearing the White Board!

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

OA145: Britt Hermes and German Defamation Law

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

OA144: Our Football-Free Superb Owl Edition

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

OA143: Same-Sex Couples and Citizenship

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

OA142: The Opioid Crisis — A (Mostly) Non-Partisan Friday

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