Opening Arguments

It's T3BE43! First, Heather gives us the answer to last week's question about the 6th amendment right to a jury trial, and then we get a fun question involving an issue not talked about enough: discrimination against hot firefighters. Get 15% off OneSkin with the code OPENING at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod Right now, the best place to play (if you aren't a patron...) is at reddit.com/r/openargs! If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Is it okay to call Trump a “fascist”? Is our democracy itself really on the line next month? And what might our legal system look like after a second Trump term? We look behind the headlines to begin to examine the nuances of these questions in this first of several planned episodes on the current state of the American right. The Anatomy of Fascism, Robert Paxton (2004) “The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism,” Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way, Journal of Democracy (April 2002) They Thought They Were Free (full text), Milton Meyer (1955) The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America, Timothy Snyder (2018) Nothing is True and Everything is Possible: The Surreal Heart of the New Russia, Peter Pomerantsev (2015) Get 15% off OneSkin with the code OPENING at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1074: We begin with a quick look at JD Vance’s cringiest moment during this week’s VP debate. Does the junior senator from Ohio know anything about immigration law--let alone vice presidenting? In our main story: Two of last term’s worst U.S. Supreme Court decisions surrounding “official acts” have been playing out in real time this week in two of the most important criminal prosecutions in the US. First, special counsel Jack Smith has just filed a monster of a brief in the DC case against Donald Trump for his responsibility for the events of January 6th, 2001. Why is this filing so unique, and what can we learn about the evidence against Trump and DOJ’s strategy going forward? Meanwhile, New York Mayor Eric Adams has filed a motion to dismiss his pending bribery charge on the grounds that bribery is pretty much legal now. Could the SCOTUS decision in Snyder v. US actually make a difference here? Finally, Matt drops a rare animal law footnote to explain how the fate of one adorable little beaver became the

Calling an audible here for reasons explained in the intro! Instead of T3BE this week, here is the very best day of Eli Bosnick playing Michael Cohen for Gavel Gavel. This was the infamous day of the Trump Trial when Todd Blanche start cross examination in the stupidest, weirdest way imaginable. Enjoy! Get 15% off OneSkin with the code OPENING at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Get 15% off OneSkin with the code OPENING at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod Secure your privacy with Surfshark! Enter coupon code OPENING for 4 months EXTRA at https://surfshark.com/OPENING OA1073 - This week we are serving up the sticky Turkish delight which is the US Attorney for the SDNY’s 53-page speaking indictment against NYC mayor Eric Adams. Matt proudly explains why Boston is historically better at (among other things) corruption than New York before we get into the quid and the quo of it all. Finally, we review Adams’s weird career as a public safety advocate and self-published author and consider what’s next for this “true friend of Turkey.” U.S. v Eric Adams indictment (unsealed 9/26/24) Google Books excerpt of Don’t Let it Happen, Eric Adams (self-published, 2009) If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Secure your privacy with Surfshark! Enter coupon code OPENING for 4 months EXTRA at https://surfshark.com/OPENING We begin by considering Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's claim that Israel's recent unprecedented operation against Hezbollah's pagers and walkie-talkies was a violation of international law. Was this one of the most sophisticated military intelligence operations in history or an indiscriminate act of terror? Did the US Supreme Court just allow Missouri to execute an innocent man? We consider the evidence against Marcellus Williams as well as the many legal and Constitutional issues with his conviction--and just how much blood enemy-of-the-show Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has on his hands in his rush to push forward an execution that the same DA's office which convicted Williams 23 years ago was desperately trying to stop. Finally, Matt drops a footnote to share his legal strategy for recovering 20 years of his digital life from the largest social media company on the planet. Do you really h

Secure your privacy with Surfshark! Enter coupon code OPENING for 4 months EXTRA at https://surfshark.com/OPENING The answer for T3BE41 is coming your way, and we launch our next Bar Prep question with Heather!  Right now, the best place to play (if you aren't a patron...) is at reddit.com/r/openargs! If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Secure your privacy with Surfshark! Enter coupon code OPENING for 4 months EXTRA at https://surfshark.com/OPENING We are excited to welcome Georgetown law professor Steve Vladeck back to Opening Arguments for a look back at how the Supreme Court responded to the infamously unruly--and increasingly more extreme--Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in its last term. How did the 5th “win by losing,” and why is there still cause for future concern even after SCOTUS reversed all but three of the eleven cases it took up from them? What kind of messages are the high court justices trying to send back to the 5th, and why aren’t they receiving them?  Also discussed: Neil Gorsuch’s most recent not-quite-true statement, why the Supreme Court continues to tolerate the dumbest standing arguments on Earth, the 5th’s use (and abuse) of administrative stays, and what may or may not be wrong with Matt’s brain. Subscribe to Prof. Vladeck’s free weekly One First newsletter “The Fifth Circuit Won by Losing,” Steve Vladeck, The A

OA1070 Secure your privacy with Surfshark! Enter coupon code OPENING for 4 months EXTRA at https://surfshark.com/OPENING We begin today’s show with updates on two small victories for the power of art against the Donald Trump legal-industrial complex before turning to our main story: the biggest leak of internal communications in Supreme Court history.  We review what we can learn about how Chief Justice John Roberts has been managing his (and the Court’s) public image from the extremely unauthorized release to the New York Times of memos that we were never supposed to read.  Also, Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee has just eliminated three more counts from the Georgia RICO indictment against Donald Trump and the co-conspirators charged with their attempt to submit a false slate of Presidential electors to a federal court based on 134-year-old Supreme Court precedent. What’s going on here, and how safe is this indictment now? Finally in this week’s Footnote Fetish, Matt explains why some scruffy-looking nerf-he

Secure your privacy with Surfshark! Enter coupon code OPENING for 4 months EXTRA at https://surfshark.com/OPENING The answer for T3BE39 is coming your way, and we launch our next Bar Prep question with Heather!  Right now, the best place to play (if you aren't a patron...) is at reddit.com/r/openargs! If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1069   Matt is doing a bit of blending of work and pleasure today, by sharing with everyone his footnote fetish. Let's all make this a safe place for Matt to share his more controversial proclivities. Joining us is the author of the book in the episode title, Peter Charles Hoffer. Professor Hoffer is Distinguished Research Professor of History at the University of Georgia. Unlike the justices, Professor Hoffer is an actual historian. Listen and find out not only the fascinating footnote history, but also yet more reasons why originalism and "history and tradition" are not good ways for untrained amateur historians like Samuel Alito to do jurisprudence. If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1068 We begin with a quick review of some of the stranger legal issues raised in this week’s Presidential debate, including such mysteries as whether it is legal to murder babies upon delivery and the factual guilt of the Central Park Five 22 years after they were exonerated by DNA evidence and a third-party confession. In our main story, we review the chaos that the Supreme Court’s legalization of Presidential crime is already causing in Donald Trump’s hush-money case and discuss the relative merits of pushing his sentencing back until after the November election. Finally, Matt drops a footnote to explain an overlooked legal story in this week’s news involving a remarkably rare grant of a common defense motion. Filings from People v. Trump (NYCourts website) SDNY Judge Hellerstein’s order denying Trump’s notice of removal (9/3/24) Justice Merchan’s order continuing Trump’s sentencing hearing to November 26, 2024 (9/6/24) If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreo

The answer for T3BE39 is coming your way, and we launch our next Bar Prep question with Heather!  Right now, the best place to play (if you aren't a patron...) is at reddit.com/r/openargs! If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1067 After some of the strangest post-conviction twists in US legal history, the Supreme Court of Maryland has just reinstated Serial killer Adnan Syed’s conviction for the murder of his high school ex-girlfriend Hae Min Lee 25 years ago. We begin by revisiting Matt’s first-ever legal podcasting deep dive with Thomas on Serious Inquiries Only (SIO354) shortly after Syed’s conviction was initially reinstated by the Maryland Appellate Court last April. How accurate were his predictions for what Maryland’s highest court would do with this, as well as for the fallout which might follow if a new team of prosecutors were to be required to go before a new judge to actually present the evidence upon which they claimed to have brought the motion which freed Syed?  Matt then briefly breaks down the Supreme Court of Maryland’s lengthy decision and explains why this is one of the strongest statements for victims rights ever made by any US state court. What are the odds of the prosecution now bringing a legitimate motio

OA1066 Privyet, fellow citizens! We begin with a quick look at recent events following  Jack Smith’s new superseding indictment in Trump’s January 6th case in DC. Why are Trump’s lawyers saying that Clarence Thomas “directed” them to file a motion to dismiss? And does DC federal judge Tanya Chutkan even care that this defendant who happens to be charged with four counts of trying to overturn an election is running for President at all?  Then in our main story: In an indictment filed this week, the Department of Justice has charged two Russian state media operatives with funding an officially unnamed production company which is allegedly (but also definitely) Tenet Media, the home of mediocre anti-woke crusaders like Dave Rubin, Tim Pool, and Lauren Southern (among others). Thomas takes us through some of the most entertaining facts alleged in the indictment, including an extremely real investor who is definitely in Paris and not Moscow, the Tucker Carlson Russian propaganda video which was a little too much e

The answer for T3BE37 is coming your way, and we launch our next Bar Prep question with Heather!  Right now, the best place to play (if you aren't a patron...) is at reddit.com/r/openargs! If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1065 (This episode first appeared on Gavel Gavel Aug. 18th) Three years ago, cinematographer Halyna Hutchins was fatally shot on the set of Alec Baldwin's film, Rust. Alec Baldwin (in addition to armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed) was subsequently criminally charged with involuntary manslaughter. Recently, Baldwin's counsel brought a motion for dismissal and sanctions, and after a shocking day in court, Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer dismissed the case with prejudice. Matt and Thomas walk through the events of that hearing and try to figure out what in the world the prosecutors were thinking. State of New Mexico v. Alexander Rae Baldwin III (Alec Baldwin) Defendant's Motion for Dismissal and Sanctions Under Brady, Giglio, and Rule 5-501 (pdf) Order Granting Defendant's Motion for Dismissal and Sanctions Under Brady, Giglio, and Rule 5-501 NMRA (pdf)

OA1064 One angry Matt brings us two stories from this week’s news: After taking some time to think about the Supreme Court’s decision that former US presidents can’t be prosecuted for anything involving--or in any way touching on--”official acts,” special counsel Jack Smith has returned to a grand jury to obtain a superseding indictment in his DC prosecution of Donald Trump. How has he retooled the charges relating to the January 6th conspiracy? How much weaker will this case be without the many federal government witnesses who would otherwise have been called, and what happens next? Here’s something everyone should know: AGs in 16 red states are now taking a bold and principled stand against--and this is 100% true--traditional marriage. In a suit filed in a Texas federal court last week, these staunch defenders of our most cherished family values argued that there are at least 550,000 US citizens who should be exiled from not only from their states but from the United States for ten years because they marrie

The answer for T3BE37 is coming your way, and we launch our next Bar Prep question with Heather!  Right now, the best place to play (if you aren't a patron...) is at reddit.com/r/openargs! If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!    

Hey folks! Wanted to give you all a preview of the bonus we just released. If you'd like to hear the full thing, please head to patreon.com/law and pledge at the 2nd tier or above! Thanks! Yay LAM is back and booker than ever! Neil Gorsuck wrote an incredibly bland book and Matt read it for some reason. Let's find out how much suck can a Gorsuck suck if a Gorsuck could suck suck. PS yes I said I'd bleep stuff on the main feed but since this ended up being a bonus I'm just marking it explicit instead.