Home Artists Posts Import Register

Downloads

Content

Today's episode focuses on two major victories that many on our side have maybe been afraid of cheering on -- first, the agreement between Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell on a power-sharing arrangement that will enable legislation to come out of equally-divided Senate committees, and second, the impeachment vote of 55-45 that the Senate has jurisdiction over Trump's impeachment.  We'll tell you why these are real victories worth celebrating and break down some Senate Rules while we're at it!

Then, we have an inspiring interview with Ruben Amaya, a 19-year-old running for the Maryland House of Delegates.

Links

  1. Yes, we're aware of the Latinos for Trump lawsuit; it's crazy and hilarious and we'll be covering it in some way, we promise!
  2. On the Senate rules:  (a) go read Rules XXV, XXVI 7(a)(3), or any other rule for yourself; (b) check out the 2001 plan (S.R. 8); and then (c) read this CRS report explaining "filling up the amendment tree."
  3. On impeachment, you'll want to read Brian Kalt's seminal 2001 Law Review article.
  4. Finally, if you'd like to check out Ruben Amaya's campaign, head on over to his website at rubenamaya.org!

Appearances

None, have 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!

Files

Comments

Anonymous

FWIW, Murkowski has openly said she wouldn't caucus with the Dems. This is rather recent within the past week or two. Which isn't to say she can't do the very regular political aboutface, maybe Alaska gets to become Wakanda in exchange. But obviously seems pretty unlikely.

Anonymous

On the topic of whether or not Republicans would vote to impeach - obviously the easiest assumption is that they won't. And I've even put money down in that direction on PredictIt. But... If Republicans were thinking smartly and long-term, they absolutely should for two reasons. #1 which is somewhat obvious, this ensures that Donald Trump is not in the GOP primary in 2024. Granted, I think his talk about running again is all bluster ... but it's bluster that he can use to keep donations coming in for four full years. And that gets to the heart of reason #2 - if Republicans don't convict, then Donald Trump absolutely *will* continue to try to grift dontations from his flock, and every $1 that Donald Trump convinces his followers to give, is likely $1 less that a Marco Rubio or Rand Paul can count on for their own Presidential campaigns, or even their re-election campaigns. So if Republicans don't want Donald Trump trying to play kingmaker with the GOP for the next 4 years AND sucking up a whole lot of the available donation capital and demanding fealty from members of the GOP ... it would absolutely be in their best long-term interest to take the short-term hit in angering his base, and voting to convict. Will Republicans in the Senate be smart enough to see that? I highly doubt it (which is why I bet against it with my own $$).