Opening Arguments is a law show that helps you make sense of the news! Comedian Thomas Smith brings on legal analysts to help you understand not only current events, but also deeper legal concepts and areas! The typical schedule will be M-W-F with Monday being a deep-dive, Wednesday being Thomas Takes the Bar Exam and patron shoutouts, and Friday being a rapid response to legal issues in the news!
Listeners of Opening Arguments that love the show mention: thomas and andrew, opening arguments, atheistically speaking, oa, bar exam, thomas smith, andrew torrez, legal news, law and politics, thomas is a great, stormy daniels, best legal podcast, legal topics, thomas', advice from a podcast, take legal advice, complex legal issues, legal and political, thomas takes, non lawyers.
The Opening Arguments podcast is truly exceptional in the realm of legal shows. With its detailed discussions, insightful analysis, and entertaining banter, it stands out from others in the genre. Hosted by Liz Dye and Andrew Torrez, it offers accessible and in-depth breakdowns of current events and pop culture from a legal perspective. The show not only educates listeners on complex legal issues but also makes it enjoyable to listen to.
One of the best aspects of this podcast is the expertise and chemistry between Liz Dye and Andrew Torrez. Both are highly knowledgeable legal analysts who provide insightful explanations of legal matters. Their discussions go beyond just scratching the surface and delve into the intricacies of each topic. They have a unique ability to make complicated concepts understandable for non-legal individuals like myself.
Additionally, the show's format sets it apart from others. It often includes performances or readings that add a fun element to their discussions. Whether it's reading excerpts from testimony or comedic interpretations of transcripts, these segments bring a unique flavor to the podcast and keep listeners engaged.
On the downside, some fans were disappointed with changes in the hosting lineup in previous years. However, with Liz Dye joining as co-host, many have found that this new dynamic has elevated the podcast even further. There were concerns about interruptions of Andrew's explanations by previous co-host Thomas Smith, but with Liz taking over, listeners appreciate that there is better flow and information is covered more thoroughly.
In conclusion, The Opening Arguments podcast is a must-listen for anyone interested in understanding legal issues in an engaging way. With Liz Dye and Andrew Torrez at its helm, listeners can expect thorough explanations, humorous commentary, and valuable insights into current events through a legal lens. While there may have been changes along the way, loyal fans understand that people make mistakes and deserve second chances. Overall, this podcast continues to provide invaluable knowledge while keeping audiences entertained week after week.

OA1217 - Well, we recorded a bit late to make sure we caught Trump's "announcement" thingy and it was... nothing. But that's good! Matt also takes us through more travel bans that are going into effect and have been way underreported on. But The Federalist has a piece saying not only is this all great, but Trump should proudly adopt 1920s immigration policy. There is no quiet part anymore. But fortunately, Matt has a fun footnote for us to bring us back up!

We begin with a delightful amuse douche from the lawyer of Colorado election tamperer Tina Peters unconditionally demanding her release from state prison because Donald Trump said so before a deep dive into our main story: an absurdly bad take from the New York Times--in both a lengthy print story and an episode of The Daily podcast--on how Joe Biden's unwillingness to be a border fascist got a border fascist elected. Matt breaks down the real causes of the uptick in asylum seekers to the U.S. during Biden's term in office (and its many unreported benefits to the economy and the nation) and provides the full context for the domestic and international law which the Times is openly arguing that Biden should have broken. You can also catch this episode on YouTube! “How Biden Ignored Warnings and Lost Americans' Faith on Immigration,” The New York Times, Christopher Flavelle (12/7/2025) “Biden Didn't Cause the Border Crisis” (Part 1 of 4), David Bier, Cato Institute (1/16/2025) “Effects of the Immigration Surge on the Federal Budget and the Economy,” Congressional Budget Office (July 2024) “Job Openings: Total Nonfarm,” U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (Oct. 2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1216 - We welcome incarcerated journalist and advocate Christopher Blackwell, calling from his home at the Washington Corrections Center. Chris is the co-founder and Executive Director of Look2Justice, a non-profit which empowers and advocates currently and formerly incarcerated people through an “inside-out” organizing model. He is also a writer whose work has appeared in (among other places) The New York Times, the Washington Post, The Boston Globe, and The Nation, and is a co-author of the new book Ending Isolation: The Case Against Solitary Confinement. Chris joins to share his story and his own deeply personal perspective on the inhumanity of solitary confinement. Look2Justice's website Ending Isolation: The Case Against Solitary Confinement, Christopher William Blackwell (Author), Deborah Zalesne (Author), Kwaneta Harris (Contributor), Terry Kupers (Contributor) (September 2025) Christopher Blackwell's published work in the New York Times Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1215 - We examine why the potential merger of Warner Brothers Discovery with either Netflix or Paramount would almost be certainly illegal under better circumstances before mourning the imminent loss of the independence of the one government agency which is supposed to stop this kind of thing. What exactly is the Federal Trade Commission, and why was destroying it a top priority for Project 2025? We then take a closer look at this week's oral arguments in Trump v. Slaughter, in which the Supreme Court's MAGA majority is poised to turn the FTC and dozens of other independent agencies into tools for Trump's corruption and graft. Finally, in today's footnote: why is an actual government website hawking the Trump Gold Card, and can the President really just make up a completely new way to give anyone with one million dollars a new path to US citizenship? Trump v. Slaughter oral arguments (12/8/2025) Humphrey's Executor v. US, 295 US 602 (1935) Federal Trade Commission Act (1914) Rebecca Slaughter's SCOTUS brief Trumpcard.gov Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

VR16 - This week on Vapid Response: it's the Hat and the Hammer, with the return of both New York Times token religious conservative columnist Ross Doot-hat and Newsweek editor-at-large Josh Hammer. We begin with a savory amuse douche in which a Christian influencer preaches against making policy based on “toxic empathy” before reading Josh Hammer taking her up on the joke by explaining why the U.S. military has the absolute right to kill anyone Josh Hammer wants dead. Finally, Ross Douthat stops in from whatever planet he has been living on with some advice for the Trump administration on how to be better Christians.

OA1214 - As the end of 2025 approaches, we are finding real cause for hope in how federal courts have been handling the Trump administration's unprecedented assault on the rule of law. In the first of what will be at least two parts, Matt and Thomas speedrun through just a few of the many wins--both big and small--that we have seen in a wide range of categories. Just Security's Litigation Tracker Farewell Messages by Recent DOJ Alumni “The Unraveling of the Justice Department,” Emily Bazelon, The New York Times (11/16/25) Docket for J.G.G. v. Trump (Alien Enemies Act and related contempt litigation) Judge William Young's decision in AAUP v. Rubio (9/30/25) Injunction blocking Trump asylum EO in RAICES v. Noem (7/2/25) Injunction blocking ICE from enforcement in certain churches in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting v. Noem (2/24/25) Injunction in Center for Taxpayer Rights v. IRSblocking IRS from sharing taxpayer information with ICE (11/21/25) Injunction in Rhode Island v. Trump blocking EO which would have dismantled the Institute for Museums and Libraries and several other federal agencies (11/21/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1213 - Thomas is back for an action-packed Rapid Response Friday! This week: we compare the letter that just earned the former President of Honduras a pardon of his conviction for definitely being involved with narcotrafficking against the Trump administration's excuses for murder on the high seas of Venezuelans suspected to be involved with narcotrafficking--and if House Speaker Mike Johnson actually has a point in blaming Barack Obama for all of this. Matt then takes a quick look at Steve Bannon's petition for review of his conviction for contempt of Congress by the Supreme Court and explains how “safe third country” agreements now give ICE the power to deport asylum seekers to Central America without a hearing on their claims. Finally in today's footnote, Matt shares an incredible story from his week: an astonishing beyond-Kafkaesque legal argument the government has ordered his client to respond to that you will have to hear to believe. “Double-Tap Warfare: Should President Obama be Investigated for War Crimes?” Florida Law Review (Jan. 2017) Steve Bannon's cert petition to the U.S. Supreme Court in Bannon v. US (10/15/2025) U.S. v. Helen Bryan, 339 U.S. 323 (1950) Matter of C-I-G-M & L-V-S-G-, 29 I&N Dec. 291, (BIA 10/31/2025) Asylum Cooperative Agreement with Honduras, Federal Register (7/8/2025) ACA with Guatemala, Federal Register (7/15/2025) “The Night Raids,” Lynzy Billing, ProPublica (12/15/2022) Juan Orlando Hernandez letter to Trump seeking pardon, New York Times (12/2/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

Today on Vapid Response Wednesday: weeks after designating “Antifa” a “domestic terror organization,” the White House hosted a panel of MAGA luminaries to update the President on the not-at-all-made-up threat to the nation posed by a thing which demonstrably does not exist. We begin with a short amuse douche, in which Tennessee Senator Marsha Blackburn is concerned about the extremely real Portland “Antifa hit list”--a thing which definitely exists exactly as described! Matt then explains why the war on “Antifa” is a threat to all of our civil liberties before we take a seat at the Antifa Round Table. The White House “antifa round table”, Youtube (10/7/25) The alleged Portland “antifa hit list” White House claims "more than 1,000%" rise in assaults on ICE agents, data says otherwise, NPR (10/10/25) Attacks on ICE up 1,000%? Trump administration claim not backed up by court records, Los Angeles Times (12/1/25) “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence,” NPSM-7 (9/25/25) “Designating Antifa as a Domestic Terror Organization,” The White House (9/22/25) “Extremist File: Jack Posobiec,” Southern Poverty Law Center

OA1212 - What's a cop to do when he stumbles onto a crime, and the evidence points to someone he knows all too well? In today's deep dive, friends become suspects, concerned parents become FBI agents, and laptops become lost jungle detritus. This criminal case out of the US District Court of the Northern Mariana Islands (a US territory in the Pacific) may not have reached the Supreme Court, or have any particularly important precedent, but what it lacks in prestige it makes up for with a fact pattern seemingly written by a law professor specifically to test your knowledge of criminal procedure and evidence. Come for the caper, stay for the OA midterm! U.S. v. Weindl, (D.N. Mar. Is. 2012) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1211 - For this special Thanksgiving episode, we take a break from the news for Matt to share his gratitude in short interviews with just a few of the staff, attorneys, and partners who make his Boston immigration law firm's work possible. Stop in to meet everyone from George the office emotional support dog to Matt's long-time friend and law partner Nicole as we discuss the daily work of deportation defense in 2025 and how everyone is looking out for their mental health throughout this unprecedented crisis. Finally in today's footnote: Matt's former student and current research assistant Olivia joins to discuss the serendipitously-timed email which brought her to OA and what it takes to prepare to have an unscripted but informative conversation about complex topics. Thanks again to everyone listening, and most especially those who have joined the community and support the show at patreon.com/law! Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1210 - This week we welcome journalist and author John J. Lennon, who is calling in from New York's Sing Sing Correctional Facility where he is serving 25 years to life for murder. Lennon's extraordinary new book The Tragedy of True Crime: Four Guilty Men and the Stories that Define Us tells his own story alongside that of three other men whose crimes were sensationalized by the media--including Manhattan “Preppy Killer” Robert Chambers--after they were convicted for murders which they unquestionably committed. It challenges us to consider what life is like for the subjects of these documentaries and re-enactments after the credits have rolled, and to ask what our national obsession with true crime is costing them--and all of us. The Tragedy of True Crime: Four Guilty Men and the Stories that Define Us, John J. Lennon (2025) The New York Times review of The Tragedy of True Crime, Pamela Colloff (9/23/25) “A Convicted Murderer's Case for Gun Control,” John J. Lennon, The Atlantic (8/21/2013) “The True Crime Stories You See on TV Are Leaving Out Something Big,” John J. Lennon, Slate (10/13/2025) “When Your Crime Becomes a Dick Wolf Show,” John J. Lennon, Rolling Stone (7/19/2025)

OA1209 - Are you done with legal doomerism? Us too. Take some time away from doomscrolling and join Matt and Jenessa for Rapid Response Friday as we consider four stories of legal corruption and authoritarianism failing in the face of honest federal judges, and a footnote about how one brave prison nurse exposed even more corruption in Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell's special treatment by the Trump administration. Complaint in United States v. State of New York, Northern Dist. of NY (7/9/25) New York's motion to dismiss in U.S. v. New York (8/4/25) Judge Mae D'Agostino's order granting plaintiff's motion to dismiss in U.S. v. NY (11/17/25) Indictment of James Comey, Eastern Dist. of VA (9/25/25) Judge William Fitzpatrick's order granting disclosure of grand jury materials in U.S. v. Comey (EDVA)(11/20/25) Judge Jeffrey Brown's order in LULAC v. Abbot, Western Dist. of TX (11/18/25) Decision on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's motion to dismiss in 9/11 litigation, Southern Dist. of NY (8/28/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

VR14 - Part 2 of the Epstein files We continue our first look at some highlights from last week's massive release of more than 20,000 pages of material from the estate of Jeffrey Epstein released by the House Oversight Committee, including Steve Bannon and ASU professor Lawrence Krauss among others. We also consider Megyn Kelly's appalling response before leaving the last word where it belongs: with the women who have come forward to tell their stories on behalf of themselves and those who will never be able to. Epstein survivors press conference held outside the US Capitol (9/3/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1208 - We go beyond the Trump-related content in the latest round of Epstein disclosures by the House Oversight Committee to explore what we can learn from the many people in Jeffrey Epstein's orbit who flattered, patronized, and enabled him. Part 1 of 2. Searchable database of Epstein records released by Courier Falling Upward: The Surprising Survival of Larry Summers, Robert Kuttner, The American Prospect (7/13/2020) Investigation at Yale Law School, Dahlia Lithwick & Susan Matthews, Slate (10/5/2018) Report on Sexual Harassment at Yale, Yale Law Women Board (10/2020) Watch this episode on YouTube here: https://youtu.be/2NX71EJ8nJc Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1207 - We record a late-breaking reaction to the recent massive round of documents released from Jeffrey Epstein's estate and discuss how Trump may have just reached his most impeachable moment so far. Matt then shares some incredible news about how the end of Chevron deference has allowed federal judges to frustrate the administration's detention and deportation policies, and Jenessa gets into a lawsuit which challenges RFK Jr's replacement of the CDC's vaccine advisory board with people who don't advise vaccines. Finally, a footgoat [sic] on how one woman's quest to keep an unusual pet in Wyoming is running cover for some of the worst people on Earth. Google Drive link to House Oversight Committee's release of documents from the Epstein estate (11/12/25) Massachusetts federal court's class certification in Guerrero Orellana Matter of Yajure-Hurtado 26 I&N Dec. 2016 (BIA 9/5/25) Complaint in Bontadelli v. City of Powell (D.WY 11/4/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

Kat Abughazaleh spent years reporting on right-wing media and movements, and she is now running to represent Illinois's 9th District in Congress on an explicitly anti-authoritarian platform. Kat joins to talk about her uniquely candid platform and community-based campaign, the state of the Democratic Party, how ICE is terrorizing Chicago during the most intensive urban immigration enforcement operation in US history, and much more. Kat Abughazalah's campaign page Kat Abughazaleh's author page at Media Matters for America

In our continuing Still Good Law series, Jenessa explains how a dispute arising from a parking garage in Wilmington, Delaware became the foundation for one of the most important concepts in civil rights: determining that a private or quasi-public individual or entity is operating “under color of law.” How does this concept help to hold law enforcement and other governmental agencies accountable, and how is it holding up in 2025? Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority, 365 U.S. 715 (1961) Monroe v. Pape, 365 US 167 (1961) 42 USC 1983

OA1205 - It's another good news Friday! Voting rights expert Jenessa runs down some of the highlights of the off-year blue sweep in this week's elections, as well as some recent unsung national victories for voting and disability rights. Matt then checks in on the Supreme Court's oral arguments from the challenge to Trump's unprecedented tariffs and why it is looking like he might actually lose his administration's first attempt to defend one of his second administration's policies on the merits. Finally, in today's footnote: Why a federal judge recently decided that a lawsuit brought by the man whose penis was once featured on the cover of the most important albums of 1990s smelled like summary judgment. Supreme Court oral arguments in Learning Resources, Inc v. Trump (11/5/2025) The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977 “Regulating Imports with a Reciprocal Tariff to Rectify Trade Pratcies that Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits,” The White House (4/2/2025)(executive order on tariffs) Solicitor General John Sauer's brief in Learning Resources Plaintiff's second amended complaint in Elden v. Nirvana LLC et al D.C. federal judge Coleen Kollar-Kotelly's opinion in combined litigation challenging Trump's executive order on citizenship requirements for voting (10/31/25) DC federal judge Amir Ali's order in National Association of the Deaf v. Trump (11/4/25) Order granting defendants' motion for summary judgment in Elden v. Nirvana, LLC (9/30/2025)

VR12 - Yes, we absolutely thought this was coming out pre-Halloween. Halloween may be over, but NEVERTHELESS THE SPOOKTACULAR PERSISTED! In this Vapid Response double feature, Thomas, Matt, and Lydia are haunted by two ghoulish takes from the past: FEATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON: Politico's insanely longform access journalism piece from August 2024 on how Project 2025 was so totally over, just never happening, nothing to see here EROSSERHEAD: New York Times resident traditional conservative Ross Douthat's 2015 analysis of why Donald Trump is definitely not a fascist We then screen a short horror film recently shot at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. “The Inside Story of How Project 2025 Fell Apart,” Ian Ward, POLITICO (8/2/2024) Project 2025 Tracker - Home “Opinion | Is Donald Trump a Fascist?,” Ross Douthat, The New York Times (12/3/2015)

OA1204 - As House Speaker Mike Johnson continues to pretend that he doesn't have to seat Democrat Adelita Grijalva well over a month after she was elected to represent Arizona's 7th Congressional district, we take a closer look at the last time that Congress refused to swear someone in and what the Warren Court had to say about it. Who was Harlem Congressman Adam Clayton Powell, why was the House so intent on excluding him in 1966, and how precedential might Powell v. McCormack be for the lawsuit which Arizona has filed on Grijalva's behalf? Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969) Adam by Adam; the autobiography of Adam Clayton Powell, Jr , Adam Clayton, Powell Jr. (1972) (Internet Archive) 2 USC Sec 25 Complaint in Arizona v. House of Representatives (filed 10/21/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1203 - Happy Halloween! We take shelter from a year of ghoulish legal news in the COURTHOUSE OF HORROR, a cabinet of macabre legal curiosities including: “SO I TRADEMARKED AN AXE MURDERER”: The historic Lizzie Borden House takes a whack at a nearby coffee shop “THE BONE DETECTOR”: Recent patent bar survivor Jenessa Seymour brings us the unbelievable story of the spookiest--and silliest!--lie detector ever registered by the US Patent & Trademark Office “ATTACK OF THE TORTIOUS CLOWNS”: Can you sue a haunted house for your fright-related injuries? “THE GREENBRIER GHOST”: The bizarre tale of how a victim's testimony from beyond the grave helped to convict her killer in an 1896 West Virginia murder trial “CANDYMAN 5: SUMMARY JUDGMENT”: In a tasty conclusion to last year's Halloween footnote on consumers disappointed with the spookiness of their seasonal treats, a Florida federal judge finds as a matter of law that there is no wrong way to make a Reese's. Finally, we close on a serious note with Jenessa's guide to how every registered voter can do their part next week to change the plot of our ongoing American horror story. Order in Ghost Adventures LLC v. Miss Lizzie's Coffee, LLC, No. 23-2000 (1st Cir.)(Selya, J.)(11/15/2024) “Federal Judge Known for Polysyllabic Prose Dies at 90,” Trip Gabriel, The New York Times, (3/21/2025) “Would You Confess Your Criminal Misdeeds to This Skeleton?,” Cara Giaimo, Atlas Obscura (5/16/2017) “Apparatus for Obtaining Criminal Confessions and Photographically Recording Them,” Patent #1749090, H.A. Shelby (filed 8/10/1927) “The Greenbrier Ghost Reexamined,” Greenbrier Historical Society, Arabeth Balseko (1/20/2022) Summary judgment order in Munoz v. Six Flags St. Louis LLC (10/12/2022)(Wallach, J.) Order granting motion to dismiss in Vidal et al v. The Hershey Company, FLSD No. 24-60831 (9/19/2025)(Damian, J.) “Your Cheat Sheet To The 2025 General Elections,” Daniel Nichanian, Bolts (10/1/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1202 - We are pleased to welcome American Immigration Council Senior Fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick for this unique conversation between a practitioner and a policy expert. The AIC is one of the country's leading sources of information and advocacy on US immigration matters, and Aaron watches and comments on these issues like no one else out there right now. Topics include, among many other things, how the Trump administration keeps getting in its own way on immigration issues, how the law of who can be released from ICE custody on bond has been radically reinterpreted within the past few months, and our hopes for the future in this critical moment for American immigration law. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick's bio on the American Immigration Council website Aaron Reichlin-Melnick on Bluesky Donate to support the American Immigration Counsel

OA1201 - This Rapid Response Friday, Matt and Jenessa play a few rounds of “Can They REALLY Do That?”, with topics including: The legal mechanism and filings behind Trump's $230 million demand for DOJ having the audacity for investigating him for crimes that he did Arizona's lawsuit against House Speaker Mike Johnson asking a DC federal court to require him to seat incoming Congresswoman Adelita Grijalva after her election DOJ's first-ever “Antifa” terrorism indictment Finally, in today's footnote Jenessa reports back from her recent experience sitting for the federal patent bar. Donald Trump's Form 95 seeking damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act for the FBI's execution of a search warrant on Mar-a-Lago (filed 8/7/2024) Transcript of former FBI agent Steven D'Antuono's testimony to the House Judiciary Committee (6/7/2023) Complaint in Arizona v. U.S. House of Representatives (filed 10/21/2025) Martin v. U.S., 605 U.S. _____ (6/12/2025) Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969) Indictment with additional “Antifa”-related charges against Autumn Hill & Zachary Evetts (10/15/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

VR11 - Today on Vapid Response Wednesday: Thomas, Lydia, and Matt review some of the worst takes to last weekend's 2700+ “No Kings” events around the U.S. But first, we savor an instant classic of an amuse douche: a recent video of a real-life encounter between a drunk-driving ICE officer and actual law enforcement. We then learn why the National Review is definitely not mad about the No Kings events going so well, and why House Majority Leader Steve Scalise IS mad about the raving socialists of the radical left who have shut down a government full of social programs which Republicans would otherwise absolutely want to fully fund if only they could. Full 30 minute video of ICE officer's DUI arrest (August 2025) Democrats Look to Rewrite the Narrative with ‘No Kings' Protests, Brittany Bernstein, National Review (10/20/2025) LEADER STEVE SCALISE: Schumer shutdown hurts families while Democrats rally in DC | Fox News (10/19/2025) “Videos Show ‘No Kings' Protests Around U.S., World,” CBS News (10/19/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1200 - We've got another great law and science episode for ya! Are polygraphs admissible? Do they work? Matt and Jenessa talk about the history, law, and science of polygraphs, and how criminal courts treat scientific testimony in general. Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1199 - Voting rights expert Jenessa Seymour takes us through this week's oral arguments in one of the most important cases before the Supreme Court this term: Louisiana v. Callais, which has the potential to end some of the most important protections in the Voting Rights Act and allow states to openly racially gerrymander their electoral districts. Also discussed: a related New York state case which may be affected by Callais, and a footnote on what one lying Chicago cop was willing to do to get out of dozens of traffic and speeding tickets--and how actual justice has finally caught up with him. Louisiana v. Callais Supreme Court docket Oral arguments in Louisiana v Callais(10/15/2025) 52 U.S.C. § 10301 (Sec 2 of the Voting Rights Act) Thornburg v Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986) Rucho v. Common Cause 588 U.S. 684 (2019) Full text of NY's John L. Lewis Voting Act Submit a comment on the Election Assistance Commission's proposal to add a proof-of-citizenship requirement to the federal voting registration form “Chicago Cop Who Falsely Blamed an Ex-Girlfriend for Dozens of Traffic Tickets Pleads Guilty but Avoids Prison,” Jennifer Smith Richards and Jodi S. Cohen, ProPublica (10/2/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

It's Vapid Response Wednesday, and Thomas, Lydia, and Matt are back to take apart more bad-faith nonsense from some of the worst people in public life. First up: The Atlantic's Caitlyn Flanagan on why it is totally fine that her good friend Bari Weiss is taking over one of the most prestigious news organizations in the United States after running a glorified blog which has been liberated from any reasonable idea of journalistic standards. MAGA law professor Johnathan Turley then completely fails to explain why capital-A “Antifa”--a set of tactics and ideas which he has previously acknowledged in writing is not actually a “group” and should not be treated as one--is actually a group which should be treated as one. Finally, Newsweek-ruiner Josh Hammer makes his second appearance on Vapid Response Wednesday as he responds to some weird nonsense from Candace Owens. “Don't Bet Against Bari Weiss,” Caitlin Flanagan, The Atlantic (10/7/25) “They Became Symbols for Gazan Starvation. But All 12 Suffer from Other Health Problems,” Olivia Reingold and Tanya Lukyanova, The Free Press “Antifa Denial: How a Violent Anti-Free Speech Group Became a Non-Entity in American Politics,” Jonathan Turley, JonathanTurley.org (10/13/2025) “Declaring Antifa A Terrorist Organization Could Achieve Its Anti-Free Speech Agenda,” Jonathan Turley (6/4/2020) “Are Antifa Members Domestic Terrorists? Background on Antifa and Federal Classification of Their Actions,” Congressional Research Service (6/9/2020) “Antiracist Skinheads and the Birth of Anti-Racist Action: An Interview With Mic Crenshaw,” Kelly Hayes, OrganizingMyThoughts.org (4/8/2024) “Josh Hammer Responds Directly to Candace Owens's Attack on Him,” Youtube (10/10/2025)

OA1198 - In this very special episode, Matt catches up with his Constitutional law professor for the first time in 23 years! We follow up with our closer look at the science behind Brown v Board (OA1186) with University of Michigan Law professor Michelle Adams, who takes us through the fascinating and ultimately tragic story of how the promise of Brown ended twenty years later in the struggle to overcome de facto segregation in her hometown of Detroit. Professor Adams has literally written the book on this subject, and if you enjoyed this conversation be sure to pick up her recent masterwork The Containment: Detroit, the Supreme Court, and the Battle for Racial Justice in the North. The Containment: Detroit, the Supreme Court, and the Battle for Racial Justice in the North, Prof. Michelle Adams (2024) Michelle Adams | University of Michigan Law School Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717 (1974) “Mapping Inequality,” University of Richmond (interactive maps of redlining in major US cities) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1197 - The National Guard is being federalized and sent into cities that the President doesn't like against the explicit will of state governors and local populations. Matt covers as much as we know from the legal developments around this ongoing national emergency, and Jenessa shares some good news which is already coming out of NY's recent recently-enhanced equal protection amendment. Finally, in today's footnote: how do you ticket a car from a moving violation when no one is driving it? NOTE: since the time of this recording, a federal judge has found that the Trump administration's stated reasons for deploying federal troops in Chicago are “simply unreliable” and blocked the deployment of the National Guard. More next week on this vital story. “Department of Defense Security For the Protection of Homeland Security Functions,” The White House (June 7, 2025) Affidavit of Portland Police Bureau Assistant Chief of Operations Craig Dobson, filed 9/29/2025 Judge Immergut's injunction in Trump v. Oregon dated 10/4/2025 9th Circuit's order staying Judge Breyer's injunction dated 6/19/2025 Memo from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth dated 9/28/2025 ”For Trump Administration, Fighting Crime Takes a Backseat to Immigration Arrests,” The Marshall Project, Beth Schwarzapfel (10/4/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

We welcome CNN anchor Jake Tapper to discuss his latest book Race Against Terror, a nonfiction legal thriller set in the long-ago world of 2011 in which the U.S. Department of Justice is dedicated to vigorously defending national security through strict adherence to due process and the rule of law. Also discussed: the current state of the media, why the world needed a book about Joe Biden's mental decline which was released within days of Donald Trump being sworn in for his second term, and why Jake is no longer on speaking terms with the surviving members of Lynyrd Skynyrd. Check out Jake's latest book Race Against Terror, out this week anywhere you buy or listen to books! You can watch this episode on YouTube, too! Race Against Terror: Chasing an Al Qaeda Killer at the Dawn of the Forever War, Jake Tapper (2025) Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again, Jake Tapper (2025) Lynyrd Skynyrd's Uncivil War, VH1 (2002)(hosted by Jake Tapper) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1196 - This week in our continuing Still Good Law series, Matt and Jenessa take on the 1963 Supreme Court case which is still believed to hold the record for angering the most Americans at the same time: 1963's Engel v. Vitale. Find out why a decision which even the Warren Court's conservative justices did not see as particularly controversial to keep New York school administrators from publicly making one 22-word statement to students every morning kicked off a firestorm which is still at the heart of the American culture wars. Engel v. Vitale , 370 U.S. 421 (1963) Engel v. Vitale (New York Supreme Court, 1960) Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947) Massachusetts General Law - Part IV, Title I, Chapter 272, Section 36 (Blasphemy statute) GOD, CIVIC VIRTUE, AND THE AMERICAN WAY: RECONSTRUCTING ENGEL, Corinna Barrett Lain, Stanford Law Review (2015)

OA1195 - How much of the federal government has actually shut down, and why? We explore the truth behind the spin, and Matt breaks the exclusive story of how at least one part of the executive branch appears to be illegally operating at full capacity. We then then connect some of the most fast-moving stories of the past few weeks to bring out the terrifying relationship between the obvious legal issues around the Trump administration's threats to invade Venezuela, underreported executive actions on “Antifa” and “domestic terrorism” and their broad potential consequences, and the Trump's recent threat to use US cities as “training grounds” for US troops. Then: good news! Jenessa shares a win on voting rights out of Pennsylvania, and Matt celebrates a resounding victory for the free speech rights of non-citizen students like Rumeysa Ozturk and Mahmoud Khalil from a Reagan-appointed federal judge. Finally, today's footnote confirms that the Wu Tang Clan is as a matter of law indeed nothing to fuck with. “Stephen Miller takes leading role in strikes on alleged Venezuelan drug boats,” The Guardian (9/29/2025) “Designating Cartels And Other Organizations As Foreign Terrorist Organizations And Specially Designated Global Terrorists” – The White House (1/20/2025) “Invocation of the Alien Enemies Act Regarding the Invasion of The United States by Tren De Aragua” – The White House (3/15/2025) “Designating Antifa as a Domestic Terrorist Organization” – The White House (9/22/2025) “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence,” The White House (9/25/2025) Boston senior federal judge William Young's order in AAUP v. Rubio (9/30/2025) Memorandum & Order Granting and denying parts of Martin Shkreli's motion to dismiss in PleasrDAO v. Shkreli (9/25/2025):

OA1194 - NY defense attorney Liz Skeen joins to talk about the evolution (or devolution?) or our Miranda rights in the past several decades. How does an actual criminal defense attorney who deals with these issues every day think about them?

OA1193 - Could Tylenol sue RFK Jr. for libel? Does the pressure the FCC put on Disney/ABC to fire Jimmy Kimmel constitute a First Amendment violation? Is the Trump administration really going to charge rural hospitals $100,000 for the privilege of being able to hire foreign doctors? In today's Rapid Response Friday we answer all of these recent patron questions and more, and Jenessa shares a personal footnote about her decision to voluntarily take the most specialized bar exam in the US legal system. The Campaign for Accountability's bar complaint against FCC chairman Brendan Carr Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers, (Presidential Proclamation dated 9/20/2025) US Patent and Trademark Office bar registration page

We watched the newly-released final episode of HBO's The Case Against Adnan Syed, and we have questions. Are the producers really trying to pin the murder of Hae Min Lee on a Black man with obvious mental health issues who was already cleared as a suspect--and did they really need to show the world a fully-nude photo of him to make that case? What is the story that they are trying to tell here, and just how far off is it from the truth? From the libelously deceptive cold open to the slyly deceptive summary of Syed's post-Serial legal proceedings and beyond, Matt brings his post-conviction expertise to make the case against The Case Against Adnan Syed. FOOTNOTES SIO354: “Serial's Adnan Syed Conviction Reinstated--What Happened? (w/Matt Cameron) (4/4/2023) OA1067: “Adnan Syed Remains a Convicted Murderer” (9/9/2024) State's Attorney Ivan Bates's memorandum in support of his Motion to Withdraw the previously-filed Motion to Vacate Judgment 85-page Court of Appeals decision in Lee v. State reinstating Adnan Syed's conviction (3/28/2023) State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby's Sep 14, 2022 motion to vacate Adnan Syed's conviction Judge Phinn's September 19, 2022 order on motion to vacate Attorney General Brian Frosh's statement re: SA Mosby's motion to vacate Attorney General's fiery response to Adnan Syed's motion to disqualify AG's office from representing the state of Maryland in this appeal More on the feud between the Attorney General and Baltimore City State's Attorney over the Adnan Syed conviction: “Maryland AG questions integrity of process used to exonerate Adnan Syed,” Maryland Daily Record (10/25/2022) Full transcription of prosecutor's handwritten note which Mosby alleged constituted Brady evidence and more information in this Baltimore Banner story: “Was Adnan Syed Note Misinterpreted?” Baltimore Banner, (11/1/2022) Appellant Young Lee's brief in Lee v. State Defendant Adnan Syed's brief in Lee v. State 2019 Court of Appeals decision finding ineffective assistance of prior counsel in Adnan Syed's case, but not enough prejudice to justify a new trial: State v. Syed :: 2019 :: Maryland Court of Appeals Decisions Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1192 - This week in Still Good Law: Katz v. U.S., the 1967 Warren Court case which on its face decided that the Fourth Amendment may apply to a public phone booth. But that's hardly all: the federal prosecution of nationally-famous bookie Charles Katz also completely changed the entire framework for how U.S. courts understand and interpret the law of searches and seizures and completely upended the concept of Fourth Amendment privacy as it had been understood up until that time. Matt provides the background on Katz and how this case made it to the Supreme Court, Jenessa considers the mental health benefits of being left alone by the government, and we talk through how important this vital holding might still be at a time when we have all given up so many of our privacy rights just by living in 2025. Katz v. U.S. (1967) Goldman v.US (1942) Silverman v. US (1967) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1191 - In today's Rapid Response Friday, we examine some of the legal questions raised as the Trump administration throws as much political capital as possible behind the recent assassination of Turning Point USA leader Charlie Kirk and their implications for the future of the First Amendment rights they claim to revere Kirk for championing. Is there any legal basis for Trump to designate a “domestic terrorist group,” let alone one that even his FBI has previously admitted doesn't exist? Matt looks back to the first Trump term to try to understand what is coming. We then examine how the states are getting around the FDA's limitations on the COVID-19 vaccine and the latest in Trump's litigious war on the media before closing things out with a fun footnote on the only other time in US history that a US President has sued someone for libel. Independent media matters more than ever now that mainstream media is compromised beyond any ability to report the truth about this administration. Support the show, join the community, and enjoy bonus content and ad-free listening at patreon.com/law! Don't forget to leave a 5-star review and share the show with your friends! Tyler Robinson indictment (filed 9/16/2025) 18 USC 2331 (federal definition of “domestic terrorism”) “Memorandum on Inadmissibility of Persons Affiliated with Antifa Based on Organized Criminal Activity” (1/5/2021) “Documents Show Trump Officials Used Secret Terrorism Unit to Question Lawyers at the Border,” Dara Lind, ProPublica (5/14/2021) “Migrant Caravan in Tijuana with ties to El Paso Texas,” DHS Field Information Report (10/18/2019) “Trump v. New York Times Company” (complaint filed 9/15/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

VR 7 - Part 1 of 2. Vapid Response Wednesday has been blessed with a surplus of truly awful takes in the days following the murder of MAGA luminary Charlie Kirk. After a brief reminder of who this man actually was in his own words, we go on to see who has achieved honors in categories ranging from Worst Obituary to Most Pretentious Response and beyond. (Next up: more of the worst, but also some of the best responses to this moment.) You can also watch this episode on YouTube! “Charlie Kirk: The American Socrates,” Owen Anderson, The Blaze (9/14/25) “Je Suis Charlie Kirk,” The Editors, The Free Press (9/12/25) “Charlie Kirk's Assassination Should Herald the End of the American Left,” John Daniel Davidson, The Federalist (9/12/25) “He May Have Pulled the Trigger But Charlie Kirk's Suspected Killer Didn't ‘Act Alone',” M.D. Kittle, The Federalist (9/12/25) “We must not posthumously sanitize Charlie Kirk's hateful life," Erin Reed, The Advocate (9/11/25) “Charlie Kirk's Legacy Deserves No Mourning,” Elizabeth Spiers, The Nation (9/12/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1190 - “You have the right to remain silent.” Anyone who grew up on American crime dramas can recite the rest of these famous warnings from memory, but do you know the whole story of Miranda v. Arizona (1966)? In today's entry in our “Still Good Law” series Matt and Jenessa voluntarily waive their rights, cautiously accept a cigarette and a Styrofoam cup of bad coffee from an alcoholic cop with a dark past, and spill everything they know about the most important criminal case in Supreme Court history. Matt provides the background on Ernesto Miranda's literal life (and death) of crime and the circumstances of his arrest, interrogation, and appeal to the Warren Court while Jenessa breaks down the science of false confessions and why not just having but knowing our Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights is so important for all of us. Oral arguments and decision in Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Miranda: The Story of America's Right to Remain Silent, Gary Stuart (2008) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1189 - The Supreme Court's next term may not start until October, but their infamous shadow--sorry, “interim”--docket is in rare form as they issue snap decisions on everything from exactly where one 14-year-old boy can pee to just how openly racist ICE gets to be. Matt and Jenessa review which major precedents the conservative majority is ignoring to enable Trump's worst policies this week before getting on to some Epstein-related legal updates and a radical new development from the Board of Immigration Appeals with massive implications for Trump's mass deportation plans. Finally, Matt drops a footnote to address one of our nation's least pressing legal questions: is it really true that a wedding in Kentucky can be legally officiated by a dead bear once described as “filled to the brim with cocaine”? SCOTUS order in Trump v. Slaughter (9/8/2025) SCOTUS order (with Kavanaugh concurrence and Sotomayor dissent) in Noem v. Vasquez-Perdomo (9/8/25) Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 21 I&N 216 (BIA 2025) Kentucky Revised Statute 402.070 P.S. Matt messed up his audio and is very sorry about it!

Just because everything else is terrible out there right now, we treated ourselves to our second consecutive Law'd Awesome Movie. By popular patron demand: it's My Cousin Vinny! We had a great time talking about this one. Actual New York Italian-American Jenessa Seymour joins to provide dead-ass balls accurate cultural context for one of the greatest Brooklyn couples ever put to film, and Matt shares his perspective as both an actual practicing courtroom lawyer and a guy who is weirdly obsessed with end credits songs that tell you about the movie you just watched. Thanks again to patrons for this one! My Cousin Vinny, Dale Launer (1992)(full script)(PDF) “‘What is a Yute?' An Oral History of ‘My Cousin Vinny,'” Andy Greene, Rolling Stone (3/7/22)

Continuing their "Good Law" series, Matt and Jenessa talk about Baggett v. Bullitt. This case held that "a State cannot require an employee to take an unduly vague oath containing a promise of future conduct at the risk of prosecution for perjury or loss of employment, particularly where the exercise of First Amendment freedoms may thereby be deterred." Jenessa gives a fascinating science breakdown on cognitive dissonance and what the effect of these vague oaths actually is. It's counter-intuitive and very interesting!

For this week's Rapid Response Friday we take up three major judicial rulings pushing back against executive overreach on three completely different topics: removals under the Alien Enemies Act, the use of the National Guard to conduct domestic law enforcement, and the imposition of tariffs as an executive action under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Also: it turns out a DC grand jury really can't indict a ham sandwich, and why Brazil is so much better at prosecuting insurrectionists than the US is. Fifth Circuit's decision in W.M.M. et al (9/2/25) Judge Charles Breyer's decision in Newson v. Trump (9/2/25) Federal Circuit's decision in V.O.S. Selections v. Trump (8/29/25)

VR6 - For today's Vapid Response Wednesday, Thomas, Lydia, and Matt review two examples from a newly-popular genre of lazy right wing op-eds: insecure white guys complaining about Supreme Court justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. What is with these losers who are so obsessed with trying to prove that one of the most qualified nominees to the high court in our lifetimes isn't fit for the job? We take dark-money sugar baby Josh Hammer up on the joke to compare his life achievements to someone who began her SCOTUS career with four times as much courtroom experience as John Roberts, Elena Kagan, Clarence Thomas, and Amy Coney Barrett combined--before moving on to trying to even understand what Federalist weirdo Shawn Fleetwood thinks he is saying. “Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is an Insult to the Supreme Court,” Josh Hammer, Newsweek (7/1/2025) “KBJ Could Learn a Few Lessons in ‘Professionalism' From Justice Barrett,” Shawn Fleetwood, The Federalist (8/20/2025) Ketanji Brown Jackson's career timeline from the Southern Poverty Law Center (4/7/22) Watch on YouTube!

OA1186 - We continue our series on some of our favorite Warren-era Supreme Court decisions with the one Warren-era decision--and very likely the only Supreme Court decision that is still good law--that most people can name from memory. The desegregation of American schools in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) stands today as one of the greatest moments of justice in American legal history, but did you know that it was also an equally important moment for social science? Matt tees up the legal and historical context and Dr. Jenessa Seymour, Esq. brings her unique background as both a lawyer and a PhD in neuroscience to provide a singular perspective on the science behind Brown and what it has meant for both law and science in the 71 years since then. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and Its Troubled Legacy (Pivotal Moments in American History), James T. Patterson (2001)

OA1185 - The rule of law has never been put more to the test in this country, and we do our best to keep up with at least a few of the most important decent developments. We begin with a brief review of the current status of wrongfully-deported Salvadoran asylum seeker Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Why is the Trump administration desperately trying to re-deport this Central American man whom they already fully admit was deported to hell by mistake to… Uganda? Matt explains. Then: Did a federal judge really just shutter Florida's “Alligator Alcatraz”? We consider the history of this surprisingly significant swampland and why an environmental challenge to its existence was so much easier to win than one based in due process, while also celebrating a major win for native rights. Another major presidential first this week: for the first time in US history, the President has claimed the authority to fire a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. Could this one decision really have global economic consequences? How much does it matter that Trump has done literally the one thing that the Supreme Court has ever told him *not* to do? We review some basics to try to understand the full magnitude of what this all means for our current moment before moving on to today's footnote: an outstanding decision from a Virginia federal judge which should stand as a model for how the judiciary can stand up to American fascism. Kilmar Abrego Garcia's Motion to Dismiss Based on Vindictive and Selective Prosecution Abrego Garcia habeas docket SCOTUS shadow docket order in Trump v. Wilcox (5/22/2025) Judge Williams's order closing “Alligator Alcatraz” (8/21/2025) Order granting motion to dismiss in U.S. v. Russell (8/26/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

VR5 Part 2 - we continue our analysis of Ghislaine Maxwell's podcast interview on the Todd Blanche Experience. Make sure you caught part 1! Watch the video here! Complete enhanced audio of Ghislaine Maxwell's proffer session with DOJ deputy Todd Blanche on July 24-25, 2025 (Thomas's Version) Maxwell transcripts and source audio from DOJ US v Maxwell indictment

Due to unprecedented corruption not getting enough of a call out, Vapid Response has taken over the Monday slot this week! It's VR5 Part 1. The Trump administration's corruption of the US Department of Justice hit new depths last week when it released audio and transcripts from convicted Jeffrey Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell's so-called “proffer session” with current top DOJ deputy (and former Trump defense attorney) Todd Blanche. OA NYC bureau chief Liz Skeen joins to help us understand just how completely unprecedented everything about this interview and its public release have been, and we discuss why DOJ's flagrantly stupid efforts to minimize the President's well-known close ties with the most notorious sex trafficker in modern US history portends a new level of American authoritarianism. Watch the video here! Complete enhanced audio of Ghislaine Maxwell's proffer session with DOJ deputy Todd Blanche on July 24-25, 2025 (Thomas's Version) Maxwell transcripts and source audio from DOJ US v Maxwell indictment

OA1184 - The saying pretty explicitly tells us to don't, and yet here they are not don'ting. This week on Rapid Response Friday: why is a Texas lawmaker filing a habeas petition asking a federal court to release her from the state capitol building? What's the deal with redistricting, and is Texas's plan to tip the balance in the U.S. House of Representatives actually legal? Jenessa brings her voting rights expertise to explain why this plan is so bad that state Democratic leaders had to go on the lam on threat of arrest to try to stop it. We then briefly discuss the import of Attorney General Pam Bondi pulling back from her attempt to take over DC's entire police force before Matt takes on a couple of little-noticed immigration policy memos in which the Trump administration has given itself dangerously broad new powers to determine things like an immigrant's “good moral character” and “anti-American” activities and associations. Finally in today's footnote: it's Columbia-on-Columbia violence as the West Coast sportswear company goes to war with the East Coast Ivy League university over some IP nonsense which gives Matt yet another excuse to be correct about fonts. Texas state representative Nicole Collier's habeas petition (filed 8/19/25) “Restoring a Rigorous, Holistic, and Comprehensive Good Moral Character Evaluation Standard for Aliens Applying for Naturalization,” USCIS (8/15/25) “Clarifying Discretionary Factors in Certain Immigration Benefit Requests,” USCIS (8/19/25) Columbia Sportswear v. Columbia University (complaint filed 7/23/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

VR4 - It's a Boston doubleheader for this Vapid Response Wednesday as Thomas, Lydia, and Matt take on two truly awful takes from the pages of Matt's hometown paper last week within 24 hours of each other. But first: a vintage amuse douche from Tucker Carlson on the evils of the National Guard's occupation of DC--in January 2021 (and apparently no other time)! Then in today's main stories: (1) Conservative opinion-haver Heather Mac Donald on why she supports Trump's absolute right to send American military personnel to occupy American cities just because he wants to. (2) Project 2025 collaborator Hillsdale College dispatches its finest journalistic mind to explain why Donald J. Trump (yes, that Donald J. Trump) is 2025's best possible candidate for a Nobel Peace Prize (yes, that Nobel Peace Prize). Watch on YouTube! “Trump was right to send the National Guard to Washington,” Heather Mac Donald, Boston Globe (8/13/25) “Breaking down the White House lies about D.C.”, Radley Balko (8/13/25) “Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize,” John J. Miller, Boston Globe (8/14/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1183 - We continue our ongoing look at some of our favorite Warren Court-era Supreme Court cases with this one-line 1958 decision finding as a matter of law that one of the most important LGTBQ magazines in U.S. history was not publishing obscenity. We begin by trying to find anything resembling smut in the archived pages of ONE magazine before Matt explains a bit more about the history of obscenity law in the U.S. and how Roth v U.S. changed everything just before ONE's cert petition was taken up. Jenessa gets into the proven psychological benefits of being allowed to be who you are in public, and we consider the state of obscenity law today and who still might want to use it. Roth v. United States | 354 U.S. 476 (1957) ONE, Incorporated v. Otto K Oleson: Appellant's Opening Brief – The Tangent Group One, Incorporated v. Olesen, 241 F. 2d 772 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 1957 - Google Scholar U.S. Supreme Court's decision on writ of certiorariin On e, Inc. v. Oleson immediately reversing 9th Circuit (1/13/1958) Complete run of One magazine from 1953-1957, Internet Archive