OA795: The X Filings – Elon Musk’s Plan to Leave No Lawyer Behind

Liz and Andrew bring you a (mostly) Trump-free show discussing all things Twitter, including the recent sanctions imposed for failure to comply with a search warrant, a lawsuit against the former Twitter lawyers, and a truly oppressive lawsuit designed to deter a charity that’s critical of… Elon Musk’s policies.

Notes
X v. Wachtell, Complaint 
https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/dwvkdolbxpm/X%20Corp%20v%20Wachtell%20-%2020230705.pdf

X v. CCDH Amended Complaint
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.416212/gov.uscourts.cand.416212.10.0.pdf

July 20, 2023 X Cease and Desist letter to CCDH
https://counterhate.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/07.20.2023-Letter-to-Imran-Ahmed.pdf

Twitter search warrant trial transcript
https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/sites/dcd/files/23sc31%20Attachment%20A%20-%20Documents%20unsealed%20with%20redactions.pdf

New York Times reporting on hate speech on Twitter
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/technology/twitter-hate-speech.html

CCDH, Toxic Twitter
https://counterhate.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Toxic-Twitter_FINAL.pdf

-Support us on Patreon: https://www.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

OA771: Trump Judge Burns Down First Amendment to Save “Free Speech”

Liz and Andrew break down the absolutely bonkers ruling by Judge Terry Doughty enjoining the Biden Administration from talking to social media. Yes, it’s even worse than you think!

Notes
Missouri v. Biden docket
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63290154/missouri-v-biden/

Doughty opinion in Louisiana v. Becerra (COVID vaccine mandate injunction)
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.185837/gov.uscourts.lawd.185837.28.0_1.pdf

OA 551
https://openargs.com/oa551-trump-may-out-of-office-but-his-federal-judges-are-not/

-Support us on Patreon: https://www.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

OA756: Twitter’s Lawyers Dunk on Musk in Trump LOLsuit

Liz and Andrew break down the latest filing by Twitter proving that the Twitter Files don’t say anything like what Elon Musk said they did. So, to summarize: Twitter still isn’t in cahoots with the Deep State to censor conservatives.

Then, it’s time for some great news out of Florida as a federal judge blocks Florida’s obscene law prohibiting the prescription of puberty blockers for three trans kids.

In the Patreon bonus, Liz and Andrew further debunk that Twitter is being paid $$$BILLIONS$$$ to… censor conservatives.

Notes
Trump Motion for Indicative Ruling https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.387133/gov.uscourts.cand.387133.191.0.pdf 

Trump Motion for Relief From Judgment
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.387133/gov.uscourts.cand.387133.191.1.pdf

Twitter reply to Indicative Motion
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.387133/gov.uscourts.cand.387133.195.0.pdf

O’Handley v. Weber
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2023/03/10/22-15071.pdf

FL PI Injunction
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flnd.460963/gov.uscourts.flnd.460963.90.0_1.pdf

Twitter Admits in Court Filing: Elon Musk Is Simply Wrong About Government Interference At Twitter
www.techdirt.com/2023/06/05/twitter-admits-in-court-filing-elon-musk-is-simply-wrong-about-government-interference-at-twitter/ 

-Support us on Patreon: https://www.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

OA742: Twitter Can’t Violate the First Amendment, But Fox Can Definitely Defame a Gov’t Official

In light of Linda Yaccarino being named CEO of Twitter, Liz and Andrew break down Trumpworld’s never-ending lawsuits against social media, and yet another defamation suit against Fox News, this one by Nina Jankowicz.

Happy Mother’s Day!

For the Patreon bonus, we discuss beer, the Superbowl, and Rule 62.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, because of course we do.

Notes
OA 551
https://openargs.com/oa551-trump-may-out-of-office-but-his-federal-judges-are-not/

Donato dismissal Trump v. Twitter
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.387133/gov.uscourts.cand.387133.165.0_6.pdf

Trump v. Twitter, Motion for Indicative Ruling
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.387133/gov.uscourts.cand.387133.191.0.pdf

FRCP 62.1
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_62.1

Jankowicz federal docket
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67365497/jankowicz-v-fox-news-network-llc/

Jankowicz complaint
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23809394-jankowicz-v-fox-complaint

-Support us on Patreon: https://www.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

OA390: Trump’s War on Twitter (A Deep Dive on Section 230)

Today’s episode breaks down the latest temper tantrum and accompanying executive order by our game show host president attacking social media platforms for having the temerity to engage in fact-checking. You’re going to be hearing a lot about “Section 230” — so we’re here to tell you exactly what that means, what Trump is trying to do, and why it matters.

We begin, however, with a pretty straightforward Andrew Was Right now that Tulsi Gabbard has voluntarily dismissed her defamation lawsuit against Hillary Clinton that we covered back in Episode 354 (“A Russian Asset Sues What?”).

Then it’s time for our deep dive into CompuServe, Prodigy, section 230 of the Telecommunications Decency Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 230 — which ended internet porn forever — and what all of that has to do with Trump’s latest tantrum over being fact-checked on Twitter. You won’t want to miss it!

After that, it’s time for an update on the amicus brief we’re filing in the Flynn case. We tell you what Flynn’s best case is, and walk through how it does and does not inform Judge Sullivan’s discretion under Rule 48(a).

And then, of course, we end with an all-new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam involving a fire at one warehouse spreading to another. If you want to play along, just share out this episode on social media using the hashtag #T3BE and we might pick you as next week’s winner!

Patreon Bonuses

We’ve got an all-new Live Q&A scheduled for Sunday, May 31 at 7 pm Eastern / 4 pm Pacific, and Patrons can click here to suggest questions and vote on the ones they want answered. Also remember that Patrons can give their input on the OA Amicus Brief!

Appearances

Andrew was just a guest on the latest episode of The Daily Beans. 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. Tulsi links: (a) click here for the news that Tulsi Gabbard has voluntarily dismissed her lawsuit; (b) here to read the original defamation lawsuit against Hillary Clinton; (c) the Time magazine story on how strong a case Tulsi Gabbard had; and (d) be sure to listen to our coverage of this from Episode 354 (“A Russian Asset Sues What?”).
  2. Trump links: (a) click here for the fact-check on Trump; (b) here is the text of 47 U.S.C. § 230; (c) for the draft of the Executive Order, check out Page 1, Page 2, Page 3, Page 4, Page 5, and Page 6.
  3. OA brief: Click here to read U.S. v Fokker Svcs. BV, 818 F.3d 733 (D.C. Cir. 2016).

-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

OA297: Twitter, Emoluments & Labor Unions

Today’s episode features a grab-bag of stories that have been making the rounds, including the recent ruling out of the Second Circuit regarding Donald Trump’s use of Twitter, a setback for our buddy Brian Frosh’s efforts to enforce the Emoluments Clauses of the Constitution, and an update on the real-word consequences of the Janus v. AFSCME decision we decry so much around here.

We begin with the Second Circuit’s ruling in Knight First Amendment Inst. v. Trump, which established that a government official may convert a social media platform such as Twitter into a “limited use public forum,” from which he may not block users on the basis of the political content of their speech — i.e., viewpoint discrimination. Almost no one understands this decision; we’ll make sure you’re one of the lucky ones who do!

Then, it’s time for a breakdown of the 4th Circuit’s ruling in In re Trump, which directs the lower court to dismiss the lawsuit (and pending discovery) against Trump in the lawsuit brought by Maryland and D.C. alleging violations of the Foreign and Domestic Emoluments Clauses. Find out what this case is all about, whether the outcome is reasonable, and what’s next.

After that, it’s time for a quick look at the real-world implications of the Janus v. AFSCME decision allowing public-sector union employees to withhold a portion of their dues otherwise allocated for administrative duties under… some crazy right-wing theory that something something something, because Sam Alito knows diminishing the power of unions will hurt Democrats. But what else did that decision do? Listen and find out!

After all that, it’s time for the most controversial #TTTBE yet, in which we discover the answer to Thomas Takes The Bar Exam (regarding larceny and robbery) … or do we? You won’t want to miss this one!

Appearances

Andrew was a guest on the latest episode of the Left at the Valley podcast discussing abortion, as well as the most recent episode of Mueller, She Wrote talking.. well, pretty much everything!

Show Notes & Links

  1. Click here to read the Second Circuit’s ruling in Knight First Amendment Inst. v. Trump (the Twitter case), and here to check out the Fourth Circuit’s ruling in In Re Trump (the Emoluments case).
  2. We first covered the emoluments case way back in Episode 78, and we interviewed Seth Barrett Tillman for his unique take in Episode 35 and Episode 36.
  3. We learned that bad stuff was coming in the emoluments litigation in Episode 239 when the 4th Circuit issued a stay of all discovery; you can read that stay order here.
  4. Finally, click here to read the LA Progressive article on Mark Janus and his conservative activism.

-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

OA 176: It’s Summer (Zervos) Time!

It’s time for another Rapid Response Friday, which means we get to break down whether Donald Trump has to respond to the Summer Zervos defamation lawsuit.  (Hint:  yes)

We begin, however,  with a potential Stormy Setback.  What’s the deal with press reports of a $10 million judgment entered against Stormy Daniels’ attorney, Michael Avenatti?  Could it jeopardize the pending litigation?  Listen and find out!

After that, we break down the recent federal district court opinion in Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump, which we covered when the case was first filed way back in Episode 77.  Are Donald Trump’s Tweets really a “protected forum” to which the First Amendment applies?  Listen and find out!

Then, we break down exactly how duplicitious Donald Trump’s personal lawyer has been regarding the Summer Zervos lawsuit.  It’s exactly as much as you’d expect!

Finally, we end with an all new Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #77 regarding the constitutional requirement to a trial by jury.  If you’d like to play along with our new Patreon perk, just retweet our episode on Twitter or share 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 the Dumb All Over Podcast, episode 70.  Go check it out!

Show Notes & Links

  1. We discussed Michael Avenatti’s pro hac vice motion in Episode 174; you can also read the LA Times article about the bankruptcy judgment, as well as check out both the Avenatti involuntary bankruptcy petition and the Avenatti creditors list.
  2. We analyzed several cases, the most hilarious of which is Kohlmayer v. AMTRAK, 124 F.Supp.2d 877 (D.N.J. 2000).
  3. Trump’s Tweets were first discussed in Episode 77, along with the Davison v. Loudon County decision.
  4. You should read the Knight First Amendment Institute v. Trump decision.
  5. This is the Supreme Court’s decision in Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997), and if you want to read Marc Kasowitz’s deliberately misleading statements yourself, you can do so here.

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