Posts

Posted on

OA384: Bridgegate Apparently Was Fine

Today’s episode updates you on all the recent goings-on at the Supreme Court, including the advent of new, social-distancing-approved oral arguments, the Court’s calendar, and today’s 9-0 reversal in Kelly v. U.S., the Bridgegate case. Oh, and while we’re at it, we also take on two lengthy Andrew Was (Sort of) Wrong segments! Phew!

We begin with a discussion of the new procedures for SCOTUS oral arguments, and give an apology to Clarence Thomas, who’s now engaged and asking questions after decades of silence on the bench. After that, it’s time to take a look at the SCOTUS calendar where we check out some suspicious timing regarding the non-release of the Title VII cases as well as 10 pending gun control cert petitions.

Then, it’s time for a deep dive into Kelly v. U.S., which we last covered in Episode 232. Andrew thought the 3rd Circuit’s analysis of “property” was plausible in that episode… and just got reversed 9-0 by a unanimous Supreme Court. Whoops!

As long as Andrew Was Wrong, how about we check back in on Andrew Yang’s lawsuit against the DNC, in which Yang (despite “not having a great case,” according to Andrew in Episode 382) nevertheless managed to secure an injunction from the Southern District of New York. Find out where this case is headed, what’s next, and why Andrew is STILL right, sort of….

Finally, Andrew Was… not wrong, exactly, but Flabbergasted that the American Bar Association reversed itself, finding Justin Walker “Well Qualified” for serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Andrew, on the other hand, continues to rate Walker “Not Qualified,” as per Episode 289.

After all that, it’s time for a brand-new #T3BE involving a nuisance plant next to a mini-golf park. Will Thomas’s winning streak continue?

Patreon Bonuses

If you missed our live Q&A, you can check out the audio here!

Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on Episode 204 of The Daily Beans, talking justiciability. If you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, event, or in front of your group, please drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

  1. Click here to read the Supreme Court’s opinion in Kelly v. U.S., and here to listen to our coverage of the Third Circuit’s opinion in Episode 232.
  2. Check out the district court’s injunction in favor of Andrew Yang reinstating the New York Democratic primary.
  3. You can check out the ABA’s “Not Qualified” ranking of Walker in 2019 and match it against their new “Well Qualified” letter here. For more on why you should #OpposeJustinWalker, check out Episode 289.

-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

-Remember to check out our YouTube Channel  for Opening Arguments: The Briefs and other specials!

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!



Download Link
Posted on

OA383: Trump’s Taxes & The CARES Act (Or: Why Your Vote Matters)

Today’s episode checks back in with the status of the consolidated cases pending before the Supreme Court regarding Trump’s tax returns. As it turns out, this overlaps pretty strongly with the show’s “B” segment about the potential for abuse in the CARES Act.

We begin with a colossal “Andrew Was Wrong” — in which Andrew optimistically predicted we’d see Trump’s tax returns in 2019. That… turned out not to be the case. So what are the odds that we’ll see Trump’s taxes before the November elections? Listen and find out!

After that, it’s time for another semi-deep-dive, and this time we’re checking back in with the just-passed CARES Act as Andrew talks about a provision we missed the first time around that has the potential to… well, you’ll just have to listen and find out!

Then, it’s time for the answer to #T3BE 176 involving burning a copy of the IRS Code. Is it illegal? If so, why?

Patreon Bonuses

If you missed our live Q&A, you can check out the audio here!

Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on Episode 121 of the Skepticrat, talking about the abuse of the Paycheck Protection Program and other crazy legal stories in the news. And if you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, event, or in front of your group, please drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

  1. Click here to read the letter sent by Liz Warren & other Democratic Senators to Deutsche Bank.
  2. Our comprehensive overview of the CARES Act was in Episode 372, and you can read the final CARES Act here.
  3. The Sunshine Act is 5 U.S.C. § 552b.

-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

-Remember to check out our YouTube Channel  for Opening Arguments: The Briefs and other specials!

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!



Download Link
Posted on

OA382: Bernie Sanders Was Right! (The DNC & Payday Lenders)

Today’s episode takes two deep dives — first, into New York’s cancellation of its Democratic Presidential Primary, and second, into the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and efforts by scumbag payday lenders to take your tax dollars despite being parasites.

We begin with a thorough examination of the DNC’s Delegate Selection Rules and the Call For Convention Rules and figure out whether Bernie Sanders can get to 25% — and why that matters. Learn why Andrew Yang’s lawsuit omits what Andrew thinks is the best argument — Rule 11.C — and exactly how it comes into play in terms of the candidates’ delegate count. We end with some optimism and a bold prediction by Andrew about the Biden campaign!

After that, it’s time for a deep dive into a provision of the CARES Act that we didn’t cover back in Episode 372, namely, the Paycheck Protection Program. How does it operate? And how are payday lenders operating on two fronts to try and take advantage of it? Listen and find out!

Then, it’s time for an all-new #T3BE about a libertarian tax protestor who sets fire to the Internal Revenue Code inside a government building. (We can’t make this stuff up.)

Patreon Bonuses

Our next LIVE Q&A is scheduled for Friday, May 1, at 8 pm Eastern / 5 pm Pacific, and you can post and vote on which questions you want to see answered! And don’t forget that we’ve released Law’d Awful Movies #39, Class Action, starring Gene Hackman and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, and featuring guest performer Matt Donnelly of the Ice Cream Social podcast!

Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on Episode 121 of the Skepticrat, talking about the abuse of the Paycheck Protection Program and other crazy legal stories in the news. And if you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, event, or in front of your group, please drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

  1. Click here to read Andrew Yang’s lawsuit against the DNC; here for the Delegate Selection Rules; and here for the Call For Convention Rules.
  2. This is the April 17, 2020 AP article suggesting that Biden may let Sanders keep his statewide delegates.
  3. Latest news regarding payday lenders: this April 29, 2020 New York Times article suggesting the fix was in at Trump’s CFPB, and former CFPB member Jonathan Lanning’s blockbuster 17-page email documenting the corruption.
  4. Here’s the list of SBA Section 7(a) lenders, and this is the relevant regulation, 13 CFR § 120.110(b).

-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

-Remember to check out our YouTube Channel  for Opening Arguments: The Briefs and other specials!

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!



Download Link
Posted on

OA381: The Legal Eagle Interview!

Today’s episode… was supposed to have two bookend segments and legal analysis, but we wound up having so much fun talking to Devin Stone, the Legal Eagle himself about nontraditional careers in the law, Tiger King and Better Call Saul, and so much more!

After that, it’s time for the answer to the first Thomas and Devin Take The Bar Exam in which it was literally Hammer Time for two friends watching football. Did Thomas and Devin get it right or wrong? Listen and find out!

Patreon Bonuses

Our next LIVE Q&A is scheduled for Friday, May 1, at 8 pm Eastern / 5 pm Pacific, and you can post and vote on which questions you want to see answered! And don’t forget that we’ve released Law’d Awful Movies #39, Class Action, starring Gene Hackman and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, and featuring guest performer Matt Donnelly of the Ice Cream Social podcast!

Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on Episode 121 of the Skepticrat, talking crazy legal stories in the news, and Episode 375 of the Scathing Atheist, breaking down the latest legal nonsense from Kansas. And if you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, event, or in front of your group, please drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

  1. Don’t forget to check out the Legal Eagle YouTube channel.

-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

-Remember to check out our YouTube Channel  for Opening Arguments: The Briefs and other specials!

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!



Download Link
Posted on

OA380: This Week at the Supreme Court

Today’s episode breaks down two significant Supreme Court decisions released this week, including Barton v. Barr (involving immigration) and Ramos v. Louisiana (involving unanimous jury verdicts). We break down each one and explain the short- and long-term implications.

First, though, it’s time for a bit of Andrew Was Right and Andrew Was Wrong. The good news: Texas has changed its Executive Order formerly prohibiting abortions and has now affirmed in open court that it will not use the COVID-19 pandemic as pretext for denying reproductive health rights! Best of all, this is exactly the result we’ve been telling you would happen over the past few weeks — even though it took us a bit to get there. But also Andrew Was Wrong? Yeah, Andrew also has a correction to issue regarding lifetime judicial appointments in Episode 378.

Then, it’s time for the main segment in which we break down the Supreme Court’s completely predicable — and utterly unjustifiable — 5-4 decision in Barton v. Barr to restrict the remedies available to legal aliens to challenge removal decisions. Find out why Neil Gorsuch openly admits that the interpretation he votes for makes no sense, textually. (Hint: it’s because these justices don’t care about jurisprudence, just about outcomes.)

After that, we tackle a second key Supreme Court decision that came out this week, Ramos v. Louisiana, in which the Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment right to a unanimous jury was incorporated to the states. Find out why this case presents a “stare decisis trap” for the Court’s liberal justices and how that explains this unique 6-3 alignment with Roberts, Alito, and Sotomayor in dissent (!)

Then, of course, it’s time for an all-new Thomas (and Devin) Take the Bar Exam, in which we preview next week’s special guest and they try and break down a criminal question about football. You won’t want to miss it!

Patreon Bonuses

Our next LIVE Q&A is scheduled for Friday, May 1, at 8 pm Eastern / 5 pm Pacific, and you can post and vote on which questions you want to see answered! And don’t forget that we’ve released Law’d Awful Movies #39, Class Action, starring Gene Hackman and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, and featuring guest performer Matt Donnelly of the Ice Cream Social podcast!

Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on Episode 375 of the Scathing Atheist, breaking down the latest legal nonsense from Kansas. And if you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, event, or in front of your group, please drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

  1. For a sneak peek at next week’s guest, check out the Legal Eagle YouTube channel.
  2. Click here to read the Court’s decisions in Barton v. Barr (involving immigration) and Ramos v. Louisiana (involving unanimous jury verdicts).
  3. In the A segment, we discuss the hilariously-secretive announcement of GA-15, the text of GA-15 itself, and quote extensively from the reply brief filed by Texas in Judge Yeakel’s court (W.D. Tex.).
  4. Our previous immigration discussions were in Episodes 301 and 314. We talked about how subsection d(1)(B) was buried on page 596 of the 750-page Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997, and also broke down the text of both 8 U.S.C. § 1229b and 8 U.S.C. § 1282.
  5. Finally, please read this amazing piece by Linda Greenhouse in the New York Times analyzing the Court’s decision in Ramos v. Louisiana.

-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

-Remember to check out our YouTube Channel  for Opening Arguments: The Briefs and other specials!

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!



Download Link
Posted on

OA379: Trump’s Contempt for the Press & Husch Blackwell

Today’s episode features a deep dive on a completely frivolous lawsuit filed by Donald Trump against a Wisconsin TV station for simply airing an ad created by Priorities USA that… uses a pastiche of Trump’s own words talking about COVID-19. Learn why Trump (and his corrupt lawyers at Husch Blackwell) are transparently trying to silence any public criticism of this President.

First, we begin with an update on the various emoluments clause cases and we learn a) the status of all three cases and b) why none are likely to be decided before the next Presidential election.

Then, it’s time for that deep dive into Trump for President, Inc. v. Northland Television d/b/a WJFW-NBC, a nonsense lawsuit designed to intimidate a local TV station for airing a garden-variety attack ad against Trump’s handling of COVID-19.

After that, it’s time to decipher whether Trump can actually de-fund the World Health Organization (WHO), as he’s threatened. (Hint: no.)

Then, of course, it’s time for the answer to a thrilling #T3BE involving breach of contract by a beloved aunt and her niece over the ownership of a business, the transfer of a lease, and some slow lawyers. Will Thomas’s win streak continue? Listen and find out!

Patreon Bonuses

We just released Law’d Awful Movies #39, Class Action, starring Gene Hackman and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, and featuring guest performer Matt Donnelly of the Ice Cream Social podcast!

Appearances

None! If you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, event, or in front of your group, please drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

  1. Whatever you do, don’t share out this anti-Trump ad created by Priorities USA on social media, or you might get sued by Trump via his lawyers at Husch Blackwell.
  2. You can read the Trump for President, Inc. v. Northland Television d/b/a WJFW-NBC lawsuit for yourself.

-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

-Remember to check out our YouTube Channel  for Opening Arguments: The Briefs and other specials!

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!



Download Link
Posted on

OA378: Trump’s Stupid Threat to “Adjourn” the Senate (A Primer on Appointments)

Today’s episode breaks down the latest threat by Donald Trump to “adjourn” the House and Senate, and explains why a) you shouldn’t be scared and b) he’s unlikely to do it. This is a stunt designed to distract us from how badly Trump has handled COVID-19; we recognize we’re sort of falling for it, so we’re bringing you a deep dive on appointments and good news as well!

We begin, however, with that good news, including an update on the HUGE VICTORY for the forces of democracy in Wisconsin in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s shameful decision that we discussed in Episode 376. And, to pile on, we talk about good news in all of the abortion cases, even those in Texas!

After that, it’s time for the main segment breaking down whether Trump can adjourn the House and Senate (probably), whether he will (almost certainly not), and why not (because there’s not much to be gained and a ton to risk). Along the way, we’ll do a deep dive into NLRB v. Noel Canning, a 2014 Supreme Court decision that constrains Presidential “recess appointments” — which is what Trump would presumably adjourn the Senate to do.

Then it’s time for a brand new #T3BE about an aunt who changes her mind about selling her business to her niece. Can she be sued? Listen and find out! And, as always, if you want to play along on social media just share out this episode along with your answer!

Appearances

None! If you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, event, or in front of your group, please drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

  1. Here’s Trump’s threat to adjourn Congress.
  2. We begin with an analysis of the Senate’s rules on advice-and-consent in approving Presidential appointments.
  3. You’ll want to read NLRB v. Noel Canning, 134 S.Ct. 2550 (2014).
  4. Finally, here’s the Tweet by Steve Vladeck with which Andrew disagrees.

-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

-Remember to check out our YouTube Channel  for Opening Arguments: The Briefs and other specials!

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!



Download Link
Posted on

Transcript of OA377: Trump’s Pyramid Schemes and Arbitration (feat. AG!)

Listen to the episode and read the show notes

Topics of Discussion:

[Show Intro]

Thomas:         Hello and welcome to Opening Arguments, this is episode 377!  I’m Thomas Smith, that’s Andrew Torrez.  How’re you doing, Andrew?

Andrew:         I am fantastic, Thomas, and I sincerely mean that!  Comnin’ off of a great interview with Andrew Seidel last week, we’ve got AG from Mueller She Wrote this week, I couldn’t be happier!

Thomas:         Not only that, we’ve got a rare two-guest show because Andrew, of course, is going to be back with us for the thrilling conclusion of T3BE, but also as you mentioned, AG from Mueller She Wrote is on for the main segment, so wow, how fun!  You know, we’re trying to keep our – we’re all quarantined but we’re keeping our interactions up!

Continue reading “Transcript of OA377: Trump’s Pyramid Schemes and Arbitration (feat. AG!)”
Posted on

Transcript of OA373: The Happy Show!

Listen to the episode and read the show notes

Topics of Discussion:

[Show Intro]

Thomas:         Hello and welcome to Opening Arguments, this is episode 373, I’m Thomas, that’s Andrew.  How’re you doing, Andrew?

Andrew:         I am fantastic, Thomas, how are you?

Thomas:         Well I’m so excited, we’re doing a happy show!

Andrew:         That’s why I’m fantastic! [Laughs]

Thomas:         I think you’re always fantastic!

Continue reading “Transcript of OA373: The Happy Show!”
Posted on

Transcript of OA372: The CARES Act, COVID-19, and Your $1,200 Check

Listen to the episode and read the show notes

Topics of Discussion:

[Show Intro]

Thomas:         Hello and welcome to Opening Arguments, this is episode 372!  I’m Thomas Smith, that’s Andrew Torrez.  How’re you doing, Andrew?

Andrew:         Well I am doing coronavirus-infested fantastic, Thomas, how are you?

Thomas:         Yeah, I mean we were all very concerned that you were infected with said coronavirus, are you feeling … better?  Recovering?

Andrew:         I honestly think that it was sort of a combination of crappy seasonal cold and then that first day it went from like 35 to 75 here and I think the pollen went nuts.  So in any event, I have been feeling lousy for about a week but following the protocols and I am on the upswing.

Continue reading “Transcript of OA372: The CARES Act, COVID-19, and Your $1,200 Check”