Today’s breaking news episode takes an in-depth look at Bucklew v. Precythe, a recent Supreme Court decision that lays bare the “originalist” view of the Eighth Amendment. Is it as bad as you think it is? (Yes.)
We begin, however, with a look at Texas v. U.S. and the recent news that the Trump administration “changed its mind” and “will no longer defend” the Affordable Care Act. What does that mean? Listen and find out!
Then, it’s time for our deep dive into Bucklew v. Precythe, the Supreme Court’s analysis of how the 8th Amendment applies in capital punishment cases.
After that, we go back to Yodel Mountain for some updates on the congressional investigations, including the Congressional request for Trump’s tax returns and an EPIC FOIA request.
And if all that isn’t enough for you, well, we end, as always, with a brand new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #121 involving the constitutionality of Presidential executive orders. As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!
Thomas was just a guest on the Cognitive Dissonance podcast; go check it out! If you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at email@example.com.
Show Notes & Links
1. Wikipedia entry on sodium thiopental can be found here.
2. Glossip v. Gross (2015)
3. Supreme Court’s opinion in Bucklew v. Precythe (Apr. 1, 2019)
4. 8th Circuit’s opinion below in Bucklew
5. Congressional letter requesting Trump’s taxes
6. Bonus! Zuckerman amicus brief in the ACA litigation.
Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law
Follow us on Twitter: @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 firstname.lastname@example.org