OA705: Can Dominion Really Take Down Fox News??

THIS IS AN EPISODE YOU’LL WANT TO SHARE!

Today, Liz and Andrew break down the latest developments in Dominion Voting Systems defamation lawsuit against Fox News. You know some of the salacious details that have been leaked, but you don’t know just how badly Fox has mangled the law. You won’t want to miss it!

Notes
Bartiromo-Fratto emails
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23697625-bartiromo-fratto-summary-redacted

Exhibits – Delightfully mad emails
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23698221/redacted-149-200.pdf

Dominion MSJ
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/redacted-documents-in-dominion-fox-news-case/dca5e3880422426f/full.pdf

Dominion Reply Supporting SJ
https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023-03-08-PUBLIC-Dominion-SJ-Reply-Brief-Fox_Redacted.pdf

Fox News Reply Brief Supporting SJ
https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/25-FNN-SJ-Reply-Brief.pdf

Edwards v. National Audobon Society, 556 F.2d 113 (1977)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=515638952298472646

Hogan v. Herald Co., 84 A.D.2d 470 (N.Y. 4th App.Div. 1982)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14598091554089425482

Brian v. Richardson, 660 N.E.2d 1126 (N.Y. 1995)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15437079674012061938

BONUS! Page v. Oath Inc., 270 A.3d 833 (Del. 2022)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3804284272223089234

-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law

Subscribe to the YouTube Channel and share our videos!

-Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

-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!

OA701: Fox’s Defamation F-Tussle and the Texas Broodmare Tax

Today, Liz and Andrew break down two stories that are all over the news: a proposed new bill in Texas that is an assault on both marriage equality and families. And then we have an update on how Dominion is doing in its defamation lawsuit against Fox News. You won’t want to miss it!

Notes
Texas HB 2889
https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/html/HB02889I.htm

TX Biennial Property Tax Report 2020-2021
https://openargs.com/wp-content/uploads/Biennial-Property-Tax-Report-Texas.pdf

2005 IRS bulletin – Frivolous Tax arguments
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-irbs/irb05-14.pdf

2007 IRS bulletin – more frivolous Tax arguments
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-irbs/irb07-14.pdf

Flora v. US, 362 U.S. 145 (1960)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13305625317215905

Helvering v. Mitchell, 303 U.S. 391 (1938)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1082206999326140100

US v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 744 (2013)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15904210835021146815

Equal Dignity for  Married Taxpayers Act
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3833/text?r=98&s=1

-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law

-Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

-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

OA697: Feelin’ the Brn(ovich)

Today is one of those good news/bad news episodes. In good news, Arizona has shined some light on a report that election denier Mark Brnovich tried to bury regarding (nonexistent) voter fraud and the 2020 election. In bad news, Florida is trying to overturn the Supreme Court because Ron DeSantis hates the press. And in great news… well, you’ll just have to listen and find out!

Notes
OA 688
https://openargs.com/oa688-oh-no-the-privilege-is-mine/

Florida HB 951
https://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/951/BillText/Filed/PDF

Florida HB 991
https://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/991/BillText/Filed/PDF

Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11598860258825518787

Federal flag bill
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-120/pdf/STATUTE-120-Pg572.pdf#page=1

FL flag bill
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0720/Sections/0720.304.html

AZ Appellate decision in Lake v. Hobbs
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Lake-COA-Ruling.pdf

 Liz Wonkette on Kari Lake and Ryan Heath
https://www.wonkette.com/breaking-kari-lake-still-not-governor

Executive Summary
https://mcusercontent.com/cc1fad182b6d6f8b1e352e206/files/4ca5c5d9-3254-2b94-dbd8-bd2a6ea8b7c3/Election_Review_Summary.pdf

Email draft correcting Brnovich
https://mcusercontent.com/cc1fad182b6d6f8b1e352e206/files/8295e52f-b336-c17e-8cbd-3c0255c99ab6/Kanefield_Fann_Document.01.pdf

-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law

-Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

-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

OA694: Dominion v. Fox: Defamation Suits Are Hard But Shutting Up is Harder

Today is one of those shows you’ll want to share around. EVERYONE is talking about the bombshell revelations from Fox News, but only Liz and Andrew can help you understand how we got here and what it all means!

Notes
Original Dominion-Fox Complaint
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20527880-dominion-v-fox-news-complaint

Dominion lawsuit against OAN
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21039565/dominion-oan-complaint.pdf

Dominion Motion for Summary Judgment (MSJ)
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/redacted-documents-in-dominion-fox-news-case/dca5e3880422426f/full.pdf

DE State docket
https://courtconnect.courts.delaware.gov/cc/cconnect/ck_public_qry_doct.cp_dktrpt_docket_report?case_id=N21C-03-257&begin_date=&end_date=#dockets

Fox Corp MSJ
https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Redacted-Public-Version-Fox-Corp-Opening-MSJ-Brief.pdf

Fox News MSJ
https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Redacted-Public-Version-FNN-Opening-MSJ-Brief.pdf

Fox News anti-SLAPP counterclaim
https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/PUBLIC-VERSION-FNNs-First-Amended-Counterclaim-Accepted.pdf

-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law

-Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

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

-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

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

Transcript of OA364: Will the Supreme Court Shield Trump’s Taxes? (No.)

Listen to the episode and read the show notes

Topics of Discussion:

[Show Intro]

Thomas:         Hello and welcome to Opening Arguments, this is episode 364, and I’m Thomas, that’s Andrew.  How’re you doing, Andrew?

Andrew:         [Laughs] I am fantastic, Thomas!  How are you?

Thomas:         I am just-  we got so much good stuff to talk about.  There are lawsuits and lawsuits and more lawsuits and they pretty much just involve Trump, but lots of questions, lots of stuff I’m seeing posted on social media, people are unclear about what a lot of this means and that’s my favorite because Andrew’s here to break it down for us and tell us how this all actually works.  So I’m excited, you excited?

Continue reading “Transcript of OA364: Will the Supreme Court Shield Trump’s Taxes? (No.)”

OA364: Will The Supreme Court Shield Trump’s Taxes? (No.)

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

  1. Don’t forget our YouTube Live Q&A this Sunday, March 1, at 1:30 pm Eastern / 10:30 am Pacific!
  2. 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

  1. Remember to check out our YouTube Channel !
  2. If you’re thinking about Democratic Voter Protection Law School Bootcamp, check out the flyer and then apply online.
  3. n the opening segment, Andrew references the U.S. Sentencing Commission (2018) report on sentences.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

OA256: The Bladensburg Cross

Today’s episode takes a deep dive into the Bladensburg Cross case currently pending before the Supreme Court with special guest Sarah Henry of the American Humanist Association.  You’ll learn that Andrew is going to speak at the AHA rally on Wednesday, February 27 right before oral arguments!

We bookend the interview with an Andrew Was Right segment about the recent Supreme Court ruling in Timbs v. Indiana first discussed back in Episode 234.

And on the back end, we briefly discuss Clarence Thomas’s bizarre and dangerous concurrence in McKee v. Cosby.  Did Justice Thomas really call for the reversal of New York Times v. Sullivan?  (Hint:  yes, yes he did.)

After all that, it’s time for the answer to Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #115 about whether you can use facts contained in settlement negotiations.  As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Appearances
Andrew was just a guest on Episode 87 of the So Here’s My Story podcast; go check it out!  And 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

  1. Click here to check out the American Humanist Association.
  2. We first analyzed Timbs v. Indiana back in Episode 234.
  3. Click here to read Thomas’s concurrence in McKee v. Cosby., and here to brush up on the classic New York Times v. Sullivan.

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!

For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed!  @oawiki

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

 

Download Link

OA252: Constitutional Conventions & the “Proud Boys”

Today’s episode features a deep dive into a listener question about Article V Constitutional Conventions.  Are they dangerous?  (Yes.)  Are they a good idea?  (No.)  We also discuss the latest ridiculous defamation lawsuit.. and discover why this one is a little different.  How?  You’ll have to listen and find out.

We begin with a little bit of news you might have missed regarding Attorney General nominee Bill Barr.

After that, it’s time to answer a listener question about liberal and conservative groups that are angling for an “Article V” Constitutional Convention to overturn Citizens United (or do other things).  We delve deeply into this provision of the Constitution and discuss the plusses and (mainly) minuses of this procedure.

Then, it’s time to dissect the recent lawsuit brought by Gavin McInnes, founder of the “Proud Boys,” which Wikipedia calls “a far-right neo-fascist organization that admits only men as members and promotes political violence.”  Find out why at least one formerly respectable lawyer thinks it’s just crazy (and actionable!) that the Southern Poverty Law Center called this a “hate group.”  And find out why the real question in this lawsuit involves something called “tortious interference” and not defamation.

After all that, it’s time for the answer to Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #113, which involved the constitutionality of abortion regulations.  As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on S3E6 of the fabulous Mueller, She Wrote podcast; go check it out!  And, as always, 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

  1. This is the lawsuit filed by the “Proud Boys” against the SPLC.
  2. This is the Wikipedia entry on the “Proud Boys.
  3. Here’s the full text of Article V of the Constitution.

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!

For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

 

Download Link

OA246: Alex Jones & Sandy Hook

Today’s episode features a deep dive into the latest developments in the lawsuit brought by parents of the victims in the Sandy Hook Massacre against Alex Jones and Infowars for repeatedly portraying the school shooting as a hoax.

We begin, however, with a question regarding our views of the 2016 Presidential Election from a Trump supporter who’s hate-funding us.  Hey, we’re good to our word!

After that, it’s time to dig in to the defamation lawsuit against Alex Jones.  We tackle the minutiae — standing, jurisdiction, statute of limitations — and the big issues as well.  If you want to know where defamation law is headed in this era of “fake news,” well, this is the show for you!

Then, it’s time for a quick visit to Yodel Mountain to check in on Rudy Giuliani and Michael Cohen.  Because of course it is.

Finally, it’s time for the answer to Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #110, which involved a dentist being sued for malpractice and product liability. As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on Episode 138 of the Naked Mormonism podcast.  Give it a listen!  And 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

1. NYT articles on using third-party votes to hack elections.
The Secret Social Media Experiment in Alabama Senate Race Imitated Russian Tactics and how the Democrats Faked Online Push to Outlaw Alcohol in Alabama Race.
2. Politico story on the Justice Democrats plans to mount primaries against incumbent Democrats it deems too moderate with the apparent backing of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
3: NYT on Alex Jones and Sandy Hook
4. Media Matters 7 minute, 13 second compilation on Alex Jones about Sandy Hook.
5. Media Matters timeline of Jones promoting conspiracy theories about Sandy Hook.
6. Yodel Mountain: Rudy Giuliani is not helping!
7. WSJ on Cohen and poll-rigging and Cohen’s response on the story: “As for the @WSJ article on poll rigging, what I did was at the direction of and for the sole benefit of @realDonaldTrump @POTUS. I truly regret my blind loyalty to a man who doesn’t deserve it.”
8. The GLORIOUS “Women for Cohen” Twitter account: Because some things on twitter make you ask, “Why?”.

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!

For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

 

Download Link