Opening Arguments

Purely speaking in legal terms, the Cosby release is even WORSE than you have likely heard. It's a complicated breakdown, but that's what Andrew is best at! Listen in to understand just how bewildering this ruling was. After that, Andrew gives us a very quick take on the Trump Org indictments. Links: Cosby opinion, Saylor dissent, Section 3125 - Title 18, Rule 404 - Character Evidence, Commonwealth v. Stipetich

If you've listened to this show long enough, you know that it is seemingly impossible to be dishonest and corrupt enough for the Bar to do something about it. Well, Rudy Giuliani found a way. The NY bar has slapped him down in a way that our esteemed Andrew Torrez has never seen before. Also, we've got an update on how Christian Healthshare Ministries are STILL a scam. Then, we talk about Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, in which the Court badly mangles eminent domain. Having just heard our deep dive in episode 500, you'll be able to spot how terrible this decision is as well! And, Andrew was right on Mahanoy v. BL!

This is a continuation of Episode 501's exploration of a rather arcane bit of legal jurisprudence that has somehow become the target du jour of the right wing, from Matt Gaetz to Newsmax to... well, Matt Gaetz again. That's right, it's an explanation of what critical race theory actually is, and whether it should be banned. (Hint: no) In this episode, you'll learn more about the definitely NOT Marxist postmodern critique of language and legal textbooks, including an in-depth discussion of a case you probably have never heard of -- Johnson & Graham's Lessee v. M'Intosh, 21 U.S. 543 (1823). And if you have heard of the case, then a) you're probably a lawyer or law student, and b) you should thank a critical legal studies theorist! We'll also get in depth with two of the founders of the CRT movement, Mari Matsuda and Kimberle Crenshaw. Learn what their unique contributions to legal scholarship were and are, and decide for yourself whether this is too dangerous for grad students to even read. Finally,

If you've heard the buzz about Critical Race Theory lately, you... probably have absolutely no idea what it actually is because the people who have already passed laws in several states banning it don't even know. But if you've heard an informed person talk about it, you may have heard that it has its roots in the law. Well then, what better place to give you a deep dive than on a law show! So what is Critical Legal Studies? How did it pave the way for Critical Race Theory? OA is on the case! Links: Why are states lining up to ban critical race theory?, The Wedge Document, Critical Race Theory Briefing Book, Florida's New Law, Helms Stalls King's Day In Senate, Marxism, Understanding Marx, Understanding Modernism, Postmodernism, The Bridge: Critical Theory: CLS Movement, The skin trade Posner review

It's bonus OA!!! Andrew takes us through whatever the hell Manchin is trying to do with Republicans, then breaks down two Supreme Court rulings for us. Spoiler: they're terrible. Links: For the People Act of 2021, 19-123 Fulton v. Philadelphia, California v. Texas

500!!!! WOOOOOOO! It's time for the deep-dive we've been putting off for 5 years. Eminent domain! Links: Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp, Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City, Murr v. Wisconsin, 2017, Kelo v. City of New London, Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, Pfizer To Close New London Headquarters

... and then goes on unhinged Twitter rant full of bad law! We're here to break down just how obviously spurious his allegations are. Then, we address the tremendous amount of feedback we got on Christian Health Sharing Ministries. Some listeners tried to defend them, or at least claimed they got out ahead. Was Andrew wrong? Are they not a scam? Find out! Links: Institute for Christian Conciliation, Access to ICC Guidelines and Rules of Procedure, Commercial Arbitration Rules, weird handbook, cost of uncovered pregnancy, Rule 5. Serving and Filing Pleadings, return affidavit, Mo Brooks raising campaign funds off wife getting served, Alabama Section 13A-7-2, 6-5-262, Rule 4. Summons

This episode is exactly why this show exists. Two stories about Merrick Garland's DoJ came out recently that gave the strong impression that Garland was defending Trump policies and even joining forces with religious bigots against LGBTQ rights. These stories are COMPLETELY misleading. As always with complicated legal stories, the truth faces a steep, uphill battle. Come along as Andrew explains why Garland is doing exactly what he should be, and would be doing even under a Bernie Sanders administration. In the first segment, we discuss the Women's Health Protection Act. Can it save us from the Supreme Court overturning Roe? Find out! Links: Manchin abortion record, Murkowski abortion record, 28 US Code § 2679 Westfall Act, Barr's first brief, E. Jean Carroll's response, CAIR v. Ballenger, 444 F.3d 659 (2006), DOJ Updates Filing, 20 US Code § 1681, Attorney General's Duty to Defend, The Indefensible Duty to Defend, Alliance defending freedom motion to intervene

Andrew stumbled across a Marketwatch article that recommended a Christian Health Sharing company to save money on health insurance. Due to this being a complete scam, Andrew was sent on a Liam Neeson-esque crusade. Let's just say he has a certain set of skills involving documents and research and deep-diving... Listen and find out why this is a scam, and why it still persists and is in fact being incentivized by our government! Yes the Biden one still! Whatever your belief system, PLEASE don't let yourself or anyone you know be taken in by this scam! Links: dumb Marketwatch article, Membership for Health Sharing Ministries Soars, Healthcare Sharing Ministries: Read the Fine Print, Buzzfeed coverage, Member Requirements, § 1501(d)(2)(B), 2016 IRS ruling, Trump EO 13877, 85 FR 35398, 26 CFR Part 1 - INCOME TAXES, NYT coverage

First story on today's show is the Chauvin motion for downward departure. The Judge said up to 30 years, Chauvin countered with "...how about a firm talking-to?" Andrew breaks down the (mostly terrible) arguments. Then, we talk about a conservative cancel culture story – a Stanford Law student put up an obviously satirical and hilarious flier roasting the Federalist Society and then was punished by the school. Listen for the details and some history on campus free speech! Links: The First Amendment Encyclopedia, Campus Hate Speech Codes, California Education Code § 94367, Corry v. Stanford, Stanford Flyer, Fed Society Complaint

Today we have special guest Nick Fish, president of American Atheists! He recently attended a meeting with the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. Is this administration doing a better job representing the millions of non-believers in the country? Find out! In the first segment, we discuss Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., the free speech case you may have heard about on The Daily. Andrew gives us a more complete breakdown and offers a prediction as to how the ruling will go! Links: Tinker v. Des Moines, Hazelwood Indep. School Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, BL v. Mahanoy Area Sch. Dist., 964 F.3d 170, Mahanoy Area School District v. BL oral arguments, Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships EO

I know I say this a lot but... this episode is action packed! So much good stuff to discuss that we had to squeeze in the Trump grand jury news into the announcements slot. Andrew breaks down what it means and what to expect. Then, a listener who actually worked on the NRA case wrote in to give us the final word on Sea Girt. But in our main segment, Andrew gives us the full breakdown on the asinine social media law Florida just passed. Eyes, look your last, because this thing is destined for the trash bin. Find out why! Then, we squeezed in a wildcard segment, if you can believe it. Did Alan Dershowitz win a defamation case against CNN? (no) Links: NRA Annual Matches Move To Sea Girt In 1892, 28 US Code § 1408, FL social media law, 47 U.S. Code § 230, Dershowitz v. CNN Order on MTD

Today Andrew breaks down Fox's motion to dismiss the Dominion lawsuit. Dominion has mountains of evidence of defamation. Fox... disagREES. Find out how their defense holds up! We also talk about the surprisingly high number of delightful emails we got about Seagirt from Australians. And finally an Andrew was slightly wrong about some Asbestos bankruptcy stuff! Links: Dominion complaint, Fox motion to dismiss, NY CPLR Rule 3211, Coomer Colorado lawsuit, Newsmax retraction, another Newsmax retraction, Newsmax Withdraws False Claims About 2020 Election, Powell motion to dismiss, Dominion response

This is not a misleading clickbait headline, this is literally what happened. Mississippi citizens passed a medical marijuana amendment and textualist conservative judges overruled it with a reading of the law so asinine that it rendered constitutional amendments by citizens impossible going forward. You have to hear the breakdown to even believe it. In the second segment, Andrew delivers some more real bad news out of the US Supreme Court. You likely heard about the abortion case, but Edwards v. Vannoy is a decision you didn't hear about that does not bode well.

And two of those names are: Jacob Wohl and the NRA! It's a consequences show! While consequences might be an endangered species these days, Tish James shows us that species still has teeth. You may know Jacob Wohl as that right wing troll who absolutely should be in jail right now for any number of things, like fabricating blackmail material against Elizabeth Warren, for example. He's in big trouble for yet another criminally awful plot. Then, Andrew breaks down the recent bankruptcy decision regarding the NRA, and why it's bad news for them and good news for not them. Links: KKK act v Wohl, court order denying stay, James motion to intervene Wohl, Wohl opposing intervention, OA410: NY AG Files to Dissolve the NRA!, Order dismissing NRA bankruptcy

Big updates in the Derek Chauvin case! First, the judge found four aggravating factors. This is what Andrew predicted, but not exactly the same four! Also, one of the other officers in the case has filed a motion alleging witness coercion. We break down what this means, and how worried we should be. In our first segment, we answer an excellent patron question about an old OA episode: What ever happened to the Arlene's Flowers case? We discussed it back on OA180, and Andrew Seidel made a prediction that held up very well. Finally, apportionmentcalculator.com has been fixed, and a listener gives us great info about Census Blocks! Links: Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, Docket for 17-108, Arlene's Flowers Remand, Thao motion, Federal indictments for all 4 cops, 18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law, Former Md. medical examiner's testimony for Chauvin defense leads to call for review of past cases, MINNESOTA SENTENCING GUIDELINES, Aggravating factors filing Appearance

Andrew is giggling like a school child right now as we present the deep-dive you didn't know you needed! It's transform...ing robots (not quite Transformers) and some really intricate IP law! It also involves Italian Trump! Before that, we have a correction on trademarking numbers, and some mini-dive into an Ugg lawsuit! Links: Ugg Lawsuit final order, 15 US Code § 1117 - Recovery for violation of rights, USD287037S - Changeable robot toy, 2003 Court Tokyo High Court Case, 2017 Arbitration, Macross Sequels and Films To Be Released Worldwide

You may have seen some alarming headlines about Chauvin's lawyers asking for a new trial over a juror being at a BLM rally, but do those alarming headlines hold up? Should we be concerned? Andrew has the full breakdown! Before that, we tackle a very interesting component of the census called the "differential privacy" method, and why it's the subject of a new lawsuit.

All-star Senator Sheldon Whitehouse is at it again! In a Judiciary subcommittee meeting, Whitehouse laid out the groundwork for how a future Supreme Court could overturn Citizens United and Shelby County v. Holder. These are two atrocious decisions that would make even the Andrewest judge lament stare decisis, but today's episode explains how a court could overturn them without doing damage to court legitimacy going forward! (if you're into that kind of thing...) Before that, Andrew breaks down SCOTUS granting cert in the NYS Rifle & Pistol Assn v Corlett. Then, we tackle a listener email claiming we badly misrepresented defense attorneys in last Tuesday's show. Links: NY State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n. v. City of New York, N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(2)(f), Supreme Court of the United States opp brief, 2nd Circuit NY State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Beach, Cert Peition, Cert granted, Supreme Court Fact-Finding and the Distortion of American Democracy, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Citizens United,

You all probably heard by now that NY lost a House seat by 89 people... But did they? Andrew argues that this has been misreported. Find out why! Along the way, find out way more than you ever wanted to about the math and Al Gore Rhythms behind apportionment! Also, Rudy Giuliani had some things taken in what shouldn't be called a "raid." Couldn't' have happened to a nicer obvious criminal! Then we answer some feedback on the previous episode, OA485: What If Your Client Tells You They’re Guilty? Links: OA307: Apportionment - The Census Fight Is Not Over, NPR 2020 Census Results, 13 US Code § 141 - Population and other census information, Executive Order on the Census, 2020 Census Apportionment Results, 2 U.S. Code § 2b, Method of Equal Proportions, Reapportionment Under the 1950 Census, "Computing Apportionment," US Census Bureau, Model Rule 3.3: Candor Toward the Tribunal