Home Artists Posts Import Register
The Offical Matrix Groupchat is online! >>CLICK HERE<<

Downloads

Content

Today's deep-dive Tuesday takes us back to a time in which politically-motivated revenge was actually seen as a scandal; namely, Chris Christie's Bridgegate.  There's a new ruling out of the Third Circuit that affects two Christie staffers, and... well, you'll just have to listen and find out!

Then, it's time to take a long look at ongoing litigation surrounding the Trump Administration's efforts to deter Democrats from registering for the Census, thus reducing their voting power.  What does a trial in district court have to do with the Supreme Court's recent grant of certiorari?

After that, we answer a terrific Patron listener question regarding the European loser-pays-legal fees model versus the American pay-your-own-way model.  Yes, the American model seems counter-intuitive at best (and downright regressive at worst), but is shifting to a loser-pays model the answer?  Andrew talks about his experiences and the guys go through a bunch of options.

And finally, we end with the answer to Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #103 on the Takings Clause!  As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Appearances

Andrew was recently a guest on the David Pakman show talking court-packing and more.  Give it a listen!  And, as always, 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. You can read the 3rd Circuit's opinion in Bridgegate by clicking here.
  2. Click here to read the Court's order in the Census litigation, which shows that Thomas-Alito-Gorsuch would have granted a stay.

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!

For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Files

Comments

Anonymous

Can't people just lie on the census if there are folks in their homes that are illegal aliens? It's not like census takers ask for ID, and I can't remember the last time I heard of anyone prosecuted for lying to a census worker.

Anonymous

For clarity, the carrier suit was dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction (because at the time everything happened no one, including him, lived in Ohio). It never got to the part where it would have been dismissed for lacking merit. It is assumed that it was only filed in Ohio because of the lack of anti-SLAPP laws there, but carrier claims he will file additional lawsuits in Minnesota, Arizona, and/or Missouri, presumably if he can find free lawyers in those states and if he is correct in his claim that his choosing to file in the wrong jurisdiction gives him the ability to ignore statute of limitation.