Home Artists Posts Import Register

Downloads

Content

Today's episode discusses the recent fines levied against Wells Fargo in connection with two specific acts of egregious fraud against consumers.  Is it enough?  Is it proof that Trump (and Mick Mulvaney) intend rigorous defense of consumers at the CFPB?  Listen and find out!

First, we delve into a grab bag of items, beginning with a heartfelt apology and Andrew Was Wrong regarding trans language.  Next, we deal with a couple of wacky legal cases, before settling in on a bevy of new gun control laws passed in Maryland.  Phew!

Then, we move into a discussion of Trump v. Hawaii, which was argued before the Supreme Court last week.  What's the latest on the Travel Ban?

After that, our "C" segment breaks down everything Wells Fargo.

Finally, we end with the answer to Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #73 about lessees, assignees, and joint and several liability.  Don't forget to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Recent Appearances

As this show comes out, Andrew was the guest masochist on Episode 141 of God Awful Movies; check it out!

And if you'd like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

  1. From our grab bag:  here is a link to the Kobach memo that's PROBABLY NOT WORTH ARGUING; this is the New York Post report on the hilarious Make America Great Again bar lawsuit; and this is the link to all the gun control bills passed in Maryland.
  2. We first discussed outgoing Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen's cease-and-desist order against Wells Fargo back in Episode 146.  The current enforcement action by the OCC can be read here.
  3. We first discussed Trump's (then only proposed) Muslim ban way back in Episode #16, when the conventional wisdom was that it was so unthinkably awful it might lead the Republican Party to replace him at the top of the ticket.  Ah, good times.
  4. Since then, we've discussed the legality of the ban again (in Episode 39), the 9th Circuit's ruling on EO-1 (in Episode 43), and, most recently, the status of OA-2 in Episode 114.  In this episode, we cite to the Government's reply brief before the Supreme Court.

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

Files

Comments

Anonymous

"the status of OA-2" typo for EO-2?

Kevin Hicks

So, if we want to be a "trans ally", do we pretend that chromosomes don't actually exist? Or, that they just don't matter? I would like to be an ally, but I also don't want to ignore reality in that pursuit.

Anonymous

Hi Kevin! Chromosomes are very real, and they very much matter. However, the point trans activists generally make is that chromosomes aren't the only thing that matters. In fact, there's no "essence" underlying biological sex -- or in other words, there's no particular trait with which you can make a clean separation between "biological males" and "biological females". Just like gender, sex is also a spectrum. Here's a few articles if you'd like to learn more. One from Nature, which says: "The idea of two sexes is simplistic. Biologists now think there is a wider spectrum than that." <a href="https://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943</a> And one from Julia Serano, who's one of my favorite writers on trans topics. She says "the term “sex” is neither simple nor straightforward: It refers to a collection of sexually dimorphic traits that are variable both across traits and within each trait." <a href="https://medium.com/@juliaserano/transgender-people-and-biological-sex-myths-c2a9bcdb4f4a" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://medium.com/@juliaserano/transgender-people-and-biological-sex-myths-c2a9bcdb4f4a</a> Let me know if you have any more questions!