Opening Arguments
Opening Arguments is a law show that helps you make sense of the news! Comedian Thomas Smith and lawyer Matt Cameron help you understand not only current events, but also deeper legal concepts and areas! The schedule is M-W-F, with the main show on Monday and Friday and Vapid Response on Wednesday!
Listen on
Apple Podcasts
Spotify
iHeart
PatreonEpisodes
OA524: Laurence Tribe Thinks Grendel's Den Case Will Stop the Texas Abortion Law. Is He Right?
Andrew's favorite Constitutional Law expert, Laurence Tribe, has written an op-ed in the Boston Globe arguing that a Massachusetts case called Larkin v. Grendel's Den will "end the Texas abortion law." That sounds too good to be true. So, is it too good to be true? Or is it just true? Find out! But that's not all, infact we've got 2 more segments in this action packed show! There's another glorious Kraken Sanctions update, which includes an itemized bill for $200,000 that Sidney Powell will be picking up. And in the wildcard, we break down an interesting case involving Facebook in Australia. They don't have a pesky Section 230 down under, which leads to some very fascinating results from an American perspective. Also we briefly discuss the Merrick Garland announcement. Links: Whitmer sanctions tab, Fink sanctions tab, Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, States' Stances on Public Interest Standing, Wis law 5.90(2)
OA523: Is the CA Recall Unconstitutional?
Andrew breaks down the state of the recall, the porked polls, and Clark v. Weber! Paffrath still seems to be some sort of Democratic frontrunner, but how much of that is real and how much is poll pork? After breaking down the interesting arguments in the suit against the recall, we answer a listener who is critical of our critical opinions of the recall. Were we wrong? Find out! Links: Clark v Weber complaint, opposition, the ruling
OA522: Roe v. Wade is Dead.
This is not an exaggeration. Sure, technically speaking the Supreme Court hasn't said the magic words "we overturn Roe v. Wade" but they used the shadow docket to effectively eliminate it. This is bad. Very, very bad. So what exactly happened? What's in the Texas law that SCOTUS allowed to stand? How completely garbage, unprecedented, and counter to the rule of law is this move? Listen the Andrew's expert analysis and find out.
OA521: Knowledge Fight Explains the Owen Shroyer Grift
Our friends Dan and Jordan from the Knowledge Fight podcast are here to break down a creative grift being pulled off by Owen Shroyer. Who tf is Owen Shroyer, Thomas asks? He's an Alex Jones wannabe who has raised $250,000 to defend himself against... basically some made up BS. Listen and enjoy this hilarious breakdown! Links: Shroyer indictment, 18 US Code § 1752, 40 US Code § 5104 - Unlawful activities, 2018 Sentencing Guidelines Manual, addendum order, 28 CFR § 50.10 reporter policy
OA520: Kraken Lawyers Hit with Sanctions! YASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Today's episode is. So. Satisfying. It's not just sanctions against all the Kraken lawyers. That alone would already be amazing. But it's ALSO consequences for world's most punchable douchebag Jacob Wohl. It's so, so good. Take a listen. You've earned it. Ok full disclosure there is a slight amount of bad news regarding Texas Democrats having to return to the state empty handed, since a couple of Democrats refuse to do the right thing and eliminate the filibuster. No sugar coating that one, but we move quickly through that and get to the awesome news! Links: Sanctions order, Texas Dems end quorum-busting efforts, FCC PROPOSES $5 MILLION ROBOCALLING FINE AGAINST JACOB WOHL AND JOHN BURKMAN
OA519: No, Britney Spears' Dad Is NOT Stepping Down as Conservator
It's another edition of Ace Associate Morgan Stringer's Pop Law! The media widely reported that Jamie Spears intends to step down as conservator. BUT.. that's a bad law thingy. He actually isn't. Tune in and hear the real law talkin'! Then, we talk about some great news in the battle for trans rights. Hobby Lobby was dealt a loss by the court. On the bad news front though, the Whole Woman's Health v. Paxton decision was horrible. But Mr. Sunshine himself, Andrew Torrez, has a positive spin for us. Links: Hobby Lobby v. Sommerville, Texas can ban common abortion procedure in second trimester, appeals court rules, prior Fifth Circuit panel opinion, Fifth Circuit en banc
OA518: Terpsichore Tries Her Hand at Frivolous Lawsuits
Terpsichore, who also goes by dozens of slight variations on her name, saw the Kraken nonsense that has led to nothing but sanctions hearing after sanctions hearing and figured why not do... more terrible law. She's suing Dominion back for eleventy billion dollars. How is that damages number justified? GFY. What are the alleged counts of defamation? GFY. Where do these horrible lawyers keep coming from and how did they beat Thomas at the bar exam? We'll never know. Hear all about it on today's show! After that, we do some Andrew was wrong, regarding gift taxes and British courts. Plus an email from the one and only Michael Marshall on Telegram and how it does seem to be the app of choice for horrible racists. Links: 26 US Code § 102, Gift Taxes, House of Lords - Wikipedia, Virginia Governor's Council, Terpsichore affidavit, Terpsichore deleted webpage, Tore Maras-Lindeman bio, complaint if you can call it that, ND vs Terp and all her names, Jones v. Trice, 360 S.W.2d 48 (1962)
OA517: Cuomo Resigns; Dominion Lawsuit Survives Motion to Dismiss - AKA Consequences for Baddies!
It's a consequences episode, our favorite genre! Our first bit of great news is that Cuomo resigned. Andrew has a few follow up thoughts on that and our episode on Cuomo, as well as some introductory information on who will be New York's first ever female Governor, Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul! Then we get to the great news of the Dominion Lawsuit surviving a motion to dismiss. If you've listened to the show for a while, you might have noticed that defamation suits tend to have a tough time surviving motions to dismiss. That's because our 1st Amendment is very broad. But the Big Liars went so beyond the pale, they're finding out even the 1st Amendment has limits. Yay! Links: NY AG report on Cuomo, Kathy Hochul, Hochul's govtrac, Hochul speaks, Survey USA poll, Emerson Poll, Dominion Opinion
OA516: We Turned Down Ads for a Scam Company Called CrowdHealth. Other Shows May Not. Send Them This!
We bring you a somewhat unusual rapid-response Friday episode in which we break down a new startup company, CrowdHealth, Inc., that is apparently engaged in a mass ad buy across the kinds of podcasts you likely listen to. This means that within a few weeks, you'll probably be hearing all sorts of paid testimonials for a product that does not exist right now and bears all the hallmarks of a classic (legal) scam. This company is funded with $6 million -- some (most?) of which will be spent on the advertising blitz we refused to be a part of. Would you trust an insurance company with just $6 million in reserves? (No.) Would you trust an insurance company that offered contradictory promises? (No.) Does it make any sense to pay an underfunded entity for the right to pay your own medical bills? (No.) We explain how this is almost certainly someone who is very familiar with the kinds of Christian Health Share Ministry scams we debunked in Episode 497 and is trying to replicate that -- only worse. Listen and find out why. For service of process purposes, Opening Arguments is a product of and is copyright (c) 2021 Opening Arguments Media, LLC, a Maryland limited liability company with its principle place of business at 28 E. Susequehanna Ave., Suite 206, Towson, Maryland 21287. This episode relied upon the following resources: Links: Websites: crowdhealth.com goes nowhere; crowdhealth.org is an unrelated company selling KN95 masks and other COVID supplies; this product is at the (unfinished) website joincrowdhealth.com. You can read the two-page flyer CrowdHealth sent out here. We explained why Christian Health Sharing Ministries are a scam back in Episode 497. You can search for CrowdHealth, Inc., a Texas corporation organized on April 19, 2021, on the Texas Corporations website's search page (it will pull up in a separate window). Here is a link to CrowdHealth's SEC Form D filing showing it raised $6,025,800 from 23 angel investors; that story was covered in the May 10, 2021 issue of the Austin Business Journal. And if you want to know more about CrowdHealth's founder, CEO, and (possibly?) it's only shareholder, Andy Schoonover, you can check out: a) Andy's LinkedIn page; b) his LinkedIn post soliciting doctors to share pricing information and promising "a bunch of uninsured folks who want to pay you quickly and $$ directly"; c) his stupid unfunny TikTok thing he shared on LinkedIn; d) his Twitter page; and e) his bio at Lion Venture Partners. Legal documents: IRS Publication 16-0051; 26 U.S.C. § 213; and 26 U.S.C § 5000A Appearances None. Invite us on! -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/, 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!
OA515: Who Governs the Governors?
NY Governor Cuomo was found to have committed criminal sexual harassment. Almost all top Democrats, including Preseident Biden, has said he must resign. But will he? If he doesn't, what options remain for removal? Meanwhile, Governor Newsom of CA is facing a recall election and isn't guilty of any serious misconduct. So what gives? How can Californians be voting to recall a relatively decent Governor, but New Yorkers can't recall a disgusting creep? As usual, Andrew has the full breakdown!
OA514: I Love It When A Plan Comes Together
Today's episode tracks recent developments in the two major stories we covered recently: last Friday's Episode 512 regarding the ongoing quest to hold lawyers accountable for the (nonsense) lawsuits they file, and Tuesday's Episode 513 about the California v. Activision Blizzard lawsuit. We begin with an Andrew Was Wrong about language and then describe the developments since the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing sued Activision Blizzard for allegations of widespread discrimination in the workplace. Learn what the Activision employees are demanding and other efforts for activism surrounding the lawsuit. After that, it's time to check in on the effect that a late-breaking sanctions order in Colorado may have on the Kraken sanction hearings we know and love. Join us as we break it down for you! Links Click here for the Judge's Order granting sanctions in O'Rourke et al. v. Dominion Voting Systems et al. (D. Colo.). King v. Whitmer docs: (a) transcript of the sanctions hearing. (b) Detroit's reply brief; (c) Lin Wood's reply brief; (d) Emily Newman's reply brief; (e) Donald Campbell's reply brief on behalf of Sidney Powell, Howard Kleinhendler and others; and (f) Gov. Whitmer's reply brief. Appearances None. Invite us on! -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/, 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!
OA513: California v. Activision Blizzard, Inc
If you're a gamer, or just very online, you have likely seen a ton of coverage of an explosive lawsuit against Activision. It alleges discriminatory behavior against women, ranging from general pay discrepancies to specific sexual misconduct claims. As usual, law-expert Andrew Torrez has the complete breakdown for us! Before that, we read a very moving email from Jane Doe #12 in the Liberty University suit. Links: The Atari Timeline, Activisionaries: How Four Programmers Changed The Game Industry, 42 US Code § 2000e–2 - Unlawful employment practices, Section 432.6 - Requiring waiver of rights prohibited
OA512: Actions Continue to Have Consequences!
Today's episode updates two separate lawsuits related to the 1/6 insurrection: Rep. Eric Swalwell's suit against Trump, Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani and Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks and the ongoing drama surrounding sanctions for the Kraken lawyers in King v. Whitmer, the Michigan lawsuit that exposed just how nonsensical all of the Kraken election lawsuits were. In the first segment, we learn that neither Merrick Garland's Department of Justice nor counsel for the House of Representatives believe that "inciting insurrection" is within the scope of your employment if you're a member of the House of Representatives, so... Mo Brooks is on his own on this one. This is all about the Westfall Act, which we last discussed in Episode 498. In the main segment, we check back in now that all the supplemental briefs have been filed after the mammoth 6-hour Michigan sanctions hearing. Learn who had the worst filing (hint: someone did worse than Lin Wood!), who had the... least worst?... and what is in store for all of the Kraken lawyers! BONUS: We've attached the complete six-hour hearing transcript. Links: Swalwell v. Trump: (a) docket report; (b) Swalwell's opposition to Brooks's Westfall Act motion; (c) decision of House counsel to decline to represent Brooks; and (d) DOJ's decision to decline to represent Brooks. We last discussed the Westfall Act in Episode 498. King v. Whitmer transcript of the sanctions hearing. Lin Wood's (a) brief 1 and brief 2; and (b) prior inconsistent brief in the Delaware Supreme Court admitting he represented plaintiffs in Michigan. Donald Campbell's brief on behalf of Sidney Powell, Howard Kleinhendler, and the rest of the Kraken idiots. Hoo boy, the brief filed by Stefanie Lambert Junttila on her own behalf... maybe don't represent yourself, Stef? And just because Stef didn't read it doesn't mean you shouldn't read Mezibov v. Allen, 411 F.3d 712 (6th Cir. 2005). The City of Detroit's (a) Safe Harbor letter and attached motion; and (b) supplemental brief (that's fire)! Remember all of this is about Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Finally, if you search the transcript you'll see Howard Kleinhendler make the "fraud vitiates everything" argument, for which David Fink rightly skewers him in the City of Detroit's supplemental brief. Check out more on this stupid argument here. Appearances None. Invite us on! -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/, 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!
OA511: More on the Censorious Right's Unconstitutional Quest to Cancel Knowledge
In a dizzy euphoria at having had a single good interaction with a stranger on Facebook, Andrew decided to listen to an episode of Bari Weiss's podcast featuring a debate between Chris Rufo and David French on Critical Race Theory. Apparently, Andrew has too much free time and not enough things to be mad at. But it inspired part 3 on Critical Race Theory and what the likely next Pokemon evolution of the moral panic will be. Links: The Argument of "Afropessimism", The Political Economy of Reparations, Black Nihilism and the Politics of Hope, Idaho HOUSE BILL NO.377, AZ HOUSE BILL 2898, AG Knudsen Issues Binding Opinion on Critical Race Theory, SC Bill H.4100
OA510: Liberty University Punished Women Who Reported Sexual Assaults, According to Complaint
The main segment of today's show is what is known in the industry as a huge bummer. Liberty University is facing a lawsuit filed by 12 women who allege that they were sexually assaulted, and that their assault was handled horribly by the University. They also allege that Liberty's code of conduct made it more likely that they would be assaulted. It's grim, but it's a necessary story to cover and Andrew has the full legal breakdown for us. In our first segment, we hear from some people who are on the ground at the Texas legislature. Links: Abbott vetoes funding, The Liberty Way, lawsuit against Liberty University, 20 U.S. Code Chapter 38, John ED Larkin, 18 US Code § 2255