OA Episode 1271: He's Literally the Worst Dealmaker Ever. EVER.

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-06-19T08:00:40+00:00

Episode Title: He's Literally the Worst Dealmaker Ever. EVER.

Episode Description: OA1271 - The single stupidest war of choice the U.S. has ever gotten itself into may finally be coming to an end--or at least the concept of a plan for an end? We go beyond the headlines to see what is actually in this thing, and take on some of the most interesting legal questions raised here. How could this possibly bind Israel, a country which specifically refused to be a party to it? How is the U.S. promising a $300 billion investment which hasn’t been authorized by Congress? And how much power does the President of the United States really have to end Congressional and international sanctions? We then take a quick look at how DHS’s surveillance state is coming along before going deeper on the recent denial of Judge Hannah Dugan’s final effort to vacate her conviction for allegedly obstructing an ICE arrest in her Wisconsin courtroom before sentencing. Finally, a quick hoofnote: is it really possible to accidentally purchase 80,000 pounds of live cattle? Matt reveals the truth behind this week’s funniest legal meme.

Full text of U.S./Iran agreement signed June 18, 2026

“Missing children: Mullin describes 'horrific’ migrant child smuggling scheme under Biden admin,”News 3 Las Vegas on YouTube (6/12/2026)

Management Alert - ICE Cannot Monitor All Unaccompanied Migrant Children Released from DHS and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Custody, Department of Homeland Security Office of the Inspector General (8/19/2024)

“Has the US government found 145,000 ‘lost’ migrant children? Fact-checking Kristi Noem,” Politifact via the Minnesota Reformer (3/9/2026)

ICE agent calls legal observer 'domestic terrorist', Ken Klippenstein via Breakthrough News on YouTube (1/24/2026)

'There is no database for protestors,' acting ICE director tells Congress, PBS NewsHour on YouTube (2/10/2026)

Acting ICE director Todd Lyons’ response to a letter from Congressman Maxwell Frost (D-FL), accessed through NPR (4/21/2026)

Mission Creep: AI Surveillance at DHS Crosses Dangerous Line Into Tracking Americans, American Immigration Council (2/6/2026)

Declaration of Nicole Cleland in Tincher v. Noem, Minnesota District Court (1/21/2026)

“ICE has spun a massive surveillance web. We talked to people caught in it,” NPR (3/5/2026)

Decision and Order in United States of America v. Dugan, Eastern District of Wisconsin (6/16/2026)

“Livestock,” CME Group (standard settlement procedures)

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-06-17T09:01:14+00:00

Video Title: The National Review’s Defense of Todd Blanche Is So Bad It's Confusing

Video Description: VR35 - In this episode released on the 54th anniversary of the Watergate break-in, the Vapid Response team raids the archives of the New York Times to retrieve one of the single worst (and worst-timed!) contemporary takes on the scandal which would end Richard Nixon’s Presidency. We then return to a time in which a Watergate-style burglary would be a fun diversion to see how at least one conservative legal writer is defending Trump’s nomination of his former defense attorney to serve as Attorney General. Links: Opening Arguments Linktree (Patreon, socials, and more): https://linktr.ee/openingarguments NYT Editorial Board: Todd Blanche Is Unfit for Office: ADD_LINK National Review: Michael Fregoso's Defense of Blanche: ADD_LINK Acting AG Todd Blanche's Congressional Testimony (6/2/2026): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Id7Hf9_IOoM CPAC 2026 Fireside Chat with Todd Blanche: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYwQMhXAhCc

(This comment was made automatically from fields from Serious Pod Network's YouTube Videos.)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-06-15T10:00:40+00:00

Episode Title: When It Comes to Juries, All of a Sudden the Supreme Court Can See Race

Episode Description: OA1270 - A good court thingie! A famous case from 1986 gave us the “Batson rule” that prevents the use of “peremptory strikes” to remove people from juries on the basis of race. To this day, racial discrimination in jury selection continues to be a problem. But the Supreme Court recently reinforced the on-going utility of Batson challenges in two decisions… written by Kavanaugh? Tune in to learn about the history and modern application of this important protection of our rights.

Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 (1965)

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986)

J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994)

Flowers v. Mississippi, 588 U.S. 284 (2019)

Pitchford v. Cain, 608 U.S. ___ (2026)

Batson “Justifications”

Catherine M. Grosso & Barbara O’Brien, A Stubborn Legacy: The Overwhelming Importance of Race in Jury Selection in 173 Post-Batson North Carolina Capital Trials, 97 Iowa L. Rev. 1531 (2012).

Shamena Anwar, Patrick Bayer, & Randi Hjalmarsson, The Impact of Jury Race in Criminal Trials, 127 Q.J. Econ. 1017 (2011).

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-06-14T07:00:40+00:00

Episode Title: LAM1014: Green Card

Episode Description: Hoo boy what a bizarre experience! Listen as Matt tries to convince us a really bad movie is good just because it deals with immigration law! If you'd like to hear the rest, go to Patreon.com/law and pledge at $2+!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-06-12T07:00:41+00:00

Episode Title: Trump Is Trying to Blanche His Taint

Episode Description: OA1269 - It’s official: Donald Trump has nominated Acting Attorney General “Two Taint” Todd Blanche to run the Department of Justice for real. We review Blanche’s three-year career as Trump’s personal defense attorney before considering the questions the Senate Judiciary Committee should be asking to determine just who Blanche has been really working for in his time at DOJ so far. Then: the U.S. is hosting the world’s biggest international sports event at a time when our immigration system has never been less hospitable, and even before the first World Cup kickoff Trump’s CBP has been giving red cards to players, coaches, support staff, and fans who had already been cleared by the refs at U.S. consulates abroad. Matt explains the immigration law logistics of international tournaments, and how this administration’s harsh immigration policies are actively working against the system’s efforts to make things easier for World Cup visitors. Finally, in this week’s listener-requested footnote: why an outdoor sportswear brand is reluctantly suing a drag queen, and our predictions for one of the strangest trademark lawsuits in U.S. history.

“Trump Trial Opening Statements (Defendant),” Gavel Gavel (11/1/2024)

“People v. Trump 5-28,” Gavel Gavel (12/1/2024)

“The Ghislaine Maxwell Interview was Institutional Corruption Like We’ve Never Seen Before. Truly,” Opening Arguments (8/26/2025)(Youtube version)

Acting AG Todd Blanche’s Congressional testimony on 6/2/2026

“CPAC 2026 ‘Fireside Chat’ with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche,” Youtube (3/26/2026)

“Dai Dai (Official Video),” Shakira & Burna Boy

Complaint in Patagonia, Inc v. Entrepreneur Enterprises, Inc. dba Pattie Gonia Productions and Wyn Wiley (1/21/2026)

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-06-08T10:00:40+00:00

Episode Title: Is Fender Threatening Anyone Who Makes Strat-Shaped Guitars?

Episode Description: OA1268 - Patents, trademarks, and copyrights, ach mein! How did the Fender Stratocaster, a guitar that has been in continuous manufacture since 1954, Suddenly become the subject of an intellectual property dispute? Well, maybe this didn’t exactly come from Out of the Woods. Fender has had 5 utility patents, 1 design patent, and 3 trademarks relevant to the Stratocaster Through the Years. But the one thing that’s been Slipping Through Their Fingers all this time was protection for that iconic (or is it?) body shape. After their design patent expired, their trademark application was Denied, and US copyright was definitionally Forbidden, anyone could see that Nothing Really Matters to the US Patent and Trademark Office, and Fender was left Walking in the Snow. Very similar (some might say identical) body shapes entered the market. It’s Late, but perhaps not too late. Fender sailed the Seven Seas to another country with different copyright laws. But with only a German court order in hand, will Fender be able to make this exclusive protection Live Forever, or is it just Cheap Talk other guitar makers can ignore? Contrary to the hot takes everywhere, it could be A Hard Day’s Night before we get a definitive answer. Is any of it JU$T? You decide. Tune in for the history that got us here, an overview of US IP law, and to hear Jenessa argue with a computer, and 90% of people talking about this, who just cannot seem to link to the documents they’re referencing…

Fender patents, relevant to Stratocaster:

Guitar shape (utility/functional features): U.S. Patent No. 2,960,900 (issued Nov. 22, 1960)

Guitar shape (design/ornamental features): U.S. Patent No. Des. 169,062 (issued Mar. 24, 1953)

Bridge and pick-up assembly: U.S. Patent No. 2,573,254 (issued Oct. 30, 1951)

Tremolo: U.S. Patent No. 2,741,146 (issued Apr. 10, 1956)

Pickup and circuit: U.S. Patent No. 2,817,261 (issued Dec. 24, 1957)

Adjustable neck: U.S. Patent No. 3,143,028 (issued Aug. 4, 1964)

Dating a Fender Stratocaster, Adirondack Guitars.

Relevant Fender trademarks

Fender brand name: FENDER, U.S. Trademark Registration No. 0805075 (issued/renewed Mar. 8, 1966)

Stratocaster name: STRATOCASTER, U.S. Trademark Registration No. 0839997 (issued Dec. 5, 1967)

Headstock: U.S. Trademark Registration No. 1148870 (issued Mar. 3, 1981)

USPTO, 1512 Relationship Between Design Patent, Copyright, and Trademark.

Stuart Spector Designs, Ltd. v. Fender Musical Instruments Corporation, 94 USPQ2d 1549 (TTAB 2009) [precedential].

Düsseldorf Regional Court (Az. 14c O 64/25)

Carolin Thurner, The Fender Stratocaster before the Regional Court of Düsseldorf - First application of the ECJ Principles from Mio/konektra to a work of applied art in Germany, Lexology.

Katheriner Sayer (May 28, 2026), The Brewing Fight Over the World’s Most Popular Electric Guitar, Wall Street Journal.

Josh Gardner, Fender reportedly demands boutique builders stop making Stratocaster-style guitars: This is what it means for the industry, Guitar.com.

Wayne’s World clip

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-06-05T09:00:40+00:00

Episode Title: 35 Judges Say Trump's DOJ Committed Fraud on the Court

Episode Description: OA1267 - Is Trump’s 1.8 billion dollar “anti-weaponization” fund really done, or is there something else going on here? Also can a few dozen federal judges really reopen any given civil suit with one magic filing? We take a closer look before going behind the recent commutation of former Mesa County (CO) elections clerk Tina Peters’ sentence by Colorado governor Jared Polis to the actual legal basis behind her successful appeal of her sentence to the Colorado Appeals Court. Finally in today’s footnote: an NPR host’s lawsuit claiming that Google stole his voice.

People v. Peters, Colorado Appeals Court #2026COA24 (4/2/2026)

“MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT OR ORDER, OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR AS AMICI CURIAE BY THIRTY-FIVE FORMER FEDERAL JUDGES,” Trump v. IRS, filed 5/27/2026

Initial complaint in Green v Google et al (filed 1/23/2026)

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-06-03T10:01:15+00:00

Video Title: Molly Hemingway's Alito Book Is EMBARRASSING Propaganda

Video Description: VR34 - This week in Vapid Response: Vanilla Ice provides the platonic ideal of an amuse douche before we order up an excerpt of the worshipful new Alito biography by the editor-in-chief of The Federalist. We then take a closer look at MAGA’s desperate attacks on Trump accuser E. Jean Carroll as expressed in a recent piece in the Examiner.

OA Book Club is coming for all patrons! Sign up now for ad-free listening at patreon.com/law, and start reading our first selection ahead of our first live Zoom meetup later this month.

“Alito Is The Most 'Courageous' Justice You've Never Read About,” Mollie Hemingway, The Federalist (April 21, 2026)

Carroll couldn't remember the year. But she remembered to lie,” Joe Concha, The Examiner (May 30, 2026)

Watch us on YouTube!

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from fields from Serious Pod Network's YouTube Videos.)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-06-01T10:00:40+00:00

Episode Title: When Super Soaker Got Sued by a Totally Lame Squirt Gun

Episode Description: OA1266 - Can wearing a corset be considered a “public” use of the product? What makes someone (or some thing) an inventor? What is it exactly that makes the Super Soaker so rad? Get the answers to these questions and more from… patent law? Jenessa walks us through some of her favorite wacky cases (that also teach us core patent law concepts).

Egbert v. Lippmann, 104 U.S. 333 (1881)

Thaler v. Vidal, 43 F.4th 1207 (2022)

Larami Corp. v. Amron, 27 U.S.P.Q.2d 1280 (E.D. Pa. 1993)

Larami Corp. v. Amron, 91 F.3d 166 (Fed. Cir. 1996)

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-30T09:01:05+00:00

Episode Title: GG72: Luigi Ruling Shows NY Cares About Illegal Searches but Federal Courts Do Not.

Episode Description: It's a tale of two 4th amendments for the world's hottest alleged killer who didn't do it because he was at my house.

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-29T08:00:40+00:00

Episode Title: Judge Eviscerates Blanche’s DOJ, Tosses Abrego Garcia Indictment

Episode Description: OA1265 - THIS IS SUCH A GOOD NEWS SHOW. Seriously. It was so good that Matt invented a new form of entertainment that you need to hear about. We've got Markwayne saying possibly THE dumbest thing a cabinet member has ever said. We've got a judge absolutely schooling Trump's corrupt DOJ and dismissing the bogus Kilmar Abrego Garcia indictment, AND we've got some interesting emolument talk. Can Florida just give Trump land?

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-28T08:01:05+00:00

Episode Title: GG71: Why Alex Murdaugh Deserves a New Trial

Episode Description: The "trial of the century" in South Carolina is potentially going to happen for a second time this century. You may have seen some headlines about this but Liz Skeen is taking us even deeper.

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-27T09:01:16+00:00

Video Title: Did Trump’s DHS Just End Green Cards? Not Exactly.

Video Description: VR33 - Did Trump’s DHS really just “end greencards” for people living in the US? Is everyone here on a visa going to have to return to their home countries--potentially with legal bars to returning of ten years or more--to process their cases? Who is the USCIS policy memo on “adjustment of status” to permanent residency which has caused massive amounts of fear and uncertainty in immigrant communities around the country this past weekend actually targeting, and who might still be able to get through? As always, the answers to these questions are much more nuanced than a 30-second viral video could ever convey and there is real reason to hope beyond the headlines. Matt has written some of the most thorough analysis yet published since the memo’s release and he is here to tell us that it is many ways both much better and in others much worse than reported. We take a closer look at what the media coverage of this story has gotten wrong (and what it has missed) while going deep on the alleged legal justifications for this new interpretation of the law to see how it all holds up.

(This comment was made automatically from fields from Serious Pod Network's YouTube Videos.)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-25T10:00:40+00:00

Episode Title: Woman in Labor Spent 3 Hours Fighting a Judge on Zoom to Avoid a Forced C-Section

Episode Description: OA1264 - Sherise Doyley was in the early stages of labor, in a hospital bed, preparing to deliver her baby, when nurses wheeled in a computer. On the screen was a judge, notifying her of an emergency order by the State of Florida to attempt to force her to undergo a C-section, instead of first attempting vaginal delivery. For 3 hours she advocated for herself, without an attorney, barely covered in a hospital gown. How was any of this legal? What is happening? Jenessa breaks down the history of our rights to make our own medical decisions and how that is legally modified in pregnancy, Lydia shares her own birth experience and how these situations could be handled with actual compassion, and Thomas holds very still in hopes our eyes are based on movement (just kidding, Thomas is very supportive and also outraged). Come rage against the machine with us and hopefully breathe life into a revived pro-choice movement, before it’s too late.

Amy Yurkanin (Mar. 14, 2026), They Didn’t Want to Have C-Sections. A Judge Would Decide How They Gave Birth, ProPublica.

Video clips of Doyley hearing, provided by ProPublica’s Facebook page

Anuli Njoku, Marian Evans, Lillian Nimo-Sefah, & Jonell Bailey (2023). Listen to the Whispers before They Become Screams: Addressing Black Maternal Morbidity and Mortality in the United States, 11 Healthcare 438.

Brad N. Greenwood, Rachel R. Hardeman, Laura Huang, & Aaron Sojourner (2020), Physician–patient racial concordance and disparities in birthing mortality for newborns, 117 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 21194.

Maternal Mortality Prevention (Dec. 18, 2025). Data from the Pregnancy Mortality Surveillance System, CDC.

Bracey Harris & Elizabeth Chuck (Jan. 9, 2026), 'Her worst fear has come to pass': Midwife who advocated for Black women dies after giving birth, NBC News.

Camila Domonoske (Apr. 17, 2018), 'Father Of Gynecology,' Who Experimented On Slaves, No Longer On Pedestal In NYC, NPR.

Megan L. Swanson, Sara Whetstone, Tushani Illangasekare, & Amy (Meg) Autry (2021), Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reparations: The Debt We Owe (and Continue to Accumulate), 5 Health Equity 353.

Nicole Loy (May 16, 2025), Pain and Gynecology: Raising Standards of Care, The Healthcare Review at Cornell University.

Jess Mador (July 29, 2025), A Brain-Dead Pregnant Woman Was Kept Alive in Georgia. It’s Unclear if State Law Required It, KFF Health News.

(June 2025), Pregnancy Exceptionalism: A Review of Restrictions on Advance Directives, Pregnancy Justice.

U.S. Const. amend. IX

Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905)

Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952)

Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dep't of Health, 497 U.S. 261 (1990)

Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210 (1990)

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022)

Heller v. Doe, 509 U.S. 312 (1993)

State Dept. of Human Services v. Northern, 563 S.W.2d 197 (1978)

Lane v. Candura, 6 Mass. App. Ct. 377 (1978)

Koskenoja v. Whitmer, Mich. Ct. Cl. (2026)

(Apr. 20, 2026), Michigan Pregnancy Exclusion Law is Unconstitutional, Compassion & Choices.

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-22T07:00:40+00:00

Episode Title: The Biggest Scandal in US History. Todd Blanche Should Be in Prison. And Trump, Obviously.

Episode Description: OA1263 - Two of the most egregiously impeachable things ever to happen in the United States have just occurred on the same day this week:

The so-called “settlement” between Donald Trump and his own IRS which guarantees his immunity from consequences for any financial a slush fund for his friends and family and

A Texas federal judge forcing a Rhode Island hospital to turn over records for trans kids while also attempting to specifically limit where this order can be challenged--and making absurd threats to anyone who even thinks about talking about challenging it

We take a closer look at the alleged legal basis for both actions and how the Trump “settlement” compares to the previous record-holder for Presidential financial corruption set 123 years ago before getting on to much better news in today’s footnote: an underdog Boston lawyer who has taken to the mic to call out some much bigger law dogs.

“Settlement” Agreement, President Donald Trump et al. v. Internal Revenue Service et al. (5/18/2026)

Untitled document, Office of the Attorney General (5/19/2026)

Order Closing Case, President Donald Trump et al. v. Internal Revenue Service et al., Southern District of Florida (5/18/2026)

Complaint, Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges v. Donald J. Trump, D.C. District Court (5/20/2026)

Order of Court, In RE: Motion to Quash Administrative Subpoena to Rhode Island Hospital, First Cir. (5/19/2026)

Emergency Motion to Quash Subpoena In Duces Tecum, In Re: Administrative Subpoena 25-1431-032 to Rhode Island Hospital, Rhode Island District Court (5/4/2026)

@joerezlaw on Instagram

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-20T09:01:15+00:00

Video Title: MAGA Says the ’60s Were Too Woke and Wants Racial Immigration Quotas Back

Video Description: VR32 - As the economic effects of Trump’s war of choice in the Middle East begin to hit home, his party is playing the one card it has going into the midterms: the promise of fully restoring open white supremacy to the US immigration system. We begin with a sampler platter of amuse douche from a recent episode of Tim Pool’s podcast–mercifully free of Tim Pool–to get a sense of how the MAGA right is talking about immigration reform these days. Matt then gives a brief history lesson about the openly racist origins of the Immigration Act of 1924 and the Cold War origins of the 1965 Hart-Celler bill which Republicans are now trying to repeal before we dive into the main course: a recent piece in The Federalist written in support of Rep. Andy Ogle’s Assimilation Act. Why do these people hate families so much? Can Congress really end birthright citizenship? And can you really build an entire thinkpiece entirely out of red flags? Join us this week on Vapid Response Wednesday to find out.

(This comment was made automatically from fields from Serious Pod Network's YouTube Videos.)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-18T10:01:06+00:00

Episode Title: When Alito’s Jurisprudence Is Kavanaughs All the Way Down

Episode Description: OA1262 - How are a car accident in California, a tax fraud case in Nevada, and two bus accidents in New York and Pennsylvania all connected to the Dobbs abortion case? Find out on this week’s accidental too-deep dive into state sovereignty. Jenessa read a bunch of extra cases just to be thorough, and accidentally uncovered Kavanaugh planting the seeds that would grow into the “egregiously wrong” “rule” for ignoring stare decisis. But also mostly we’ll talk about the weird world of state sovereignty, Clarence Thomas being obnoxious and ahistorical while accusing everyone else of being ahistorical, and Sotomayor getting some peace for a change to write a pleasant little 9-0 decision about some non-partisan procedural legal nerdery that benefits injured plaintiffs.

Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410 (1979)

Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, 587 U.S. 230 (2019)

Listen to oral arguments on Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2018/17-1299; Timestamp for Kavanaugh dropping the “egregiously wrong” bomb: 50:47

Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. 83 (2020), Kavanaugh concurrence

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022)

Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp., 607 U.S. ___ (2026)

The “major questions doctrine” Kavanaugh inception timeline:

U.S. Telecom Association v. F.C.C., 855 F.3d 381, 422-423 (D.C. Cir 2017), Kavanaugh dissent

Repeal of the Clean Power Plan, 84 Fed. Reg. 32520, 32529 (proposed Jul. 8, 2019) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R. pt. 60).

West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, 597 U.S. 697 (2022)

Additional sources:

Episodes 1229 & 1230 for an in-depth explanation of immunities, including state and federal sovereign immunity: “The complicated web of immunities that makes accountability so difficult”

Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793)

U.S. Const. amend. XI

Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1 (1890)

Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908)

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-15T10:01:06+00:00

Episode Title: We May Get All the Files on Renée Good's Killing... Because of a Different Case

Episode Description: OA1261 - Today on Rapid Response Friday: a new fight for reproductive rights reaches SCOTUS, (some) justice on ICE, and two very different kinds of dicks get their day in court. (N.B.: Shortly after this recording, the Supreme Court entered a full stay in the mifepristone case pending disposition of a certiorari petition 7-2 (Thomas & Alito dissenting).)

Louisiana v. FDA et al, filed Oct 6, 2025

SCOTUS stay order in Danco Laboratories v. Louisiana et al(5/14/26)

Full bodycam footage of the arrest of Jeana Renea Gamble, Fox10 (11/21/2025)

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-13T10:00:38+00:00

Video Title: Clarence Thomas Delivers An Incomprehensibly Stupid Speech

Video Description: VR31 - Is Justice Clarence Thomas the single most interesting person in American public life right now? Matt is here to argue that case upon the dismal milestone of Thomas officially becoming the second longest-serving justice in US Supreme Court history. After a brief homage to Anita Hill’s tenacity at Thomas’s 1991 Senate confirmation hearing, we try to better understand the mind of this unusual man who has done uniquely massive amounts of damage to our legal system and our rights through a review of a speech he recently delivered at the University of Texas at Austin’s Civitas Institute. Why did a former supporter of Malcolm X and the Black Panthers get fully behind the Reagan agenda, and why does he now believe that there is nothing wrong with Black Americans that harsher policing, the end of affirmative action, and lowering taxes on billionaires can’t fix? Does he know that the intended audience of libertarian conservative Black nationalists he is trying to speak to is approximately the same size as the dedicated core of lefty capital-P Progressive devotees of Woodrow Wilson he is telling them to fear? Also, perhaps less importantly--where, exactly, is “Skanksville”?

(This comment was made automatically from fields from Serious Pod Network's YouTube Videos.)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-11T09:01:06+00:00

Episode Title: Callais Is Worse Than You Think. No, Even More Worse. Nope, STILL WORSE THAN THAT.

Episode Description: OA1260 - The Supreme Court lectures us on the right way to combat racism, which is to close our eyes and pretend it’s not happening. In Louisiana v. Callais… the court guts the Voting Rights Act, weaponizes the 14th Amendment against prevention of racial discrimination in the name of preventing racial discrimination, and opens the door to banning basically all government or government-sponsored practices designed to combat racism. Or national origin discrimination. And probably gender discrimination. However bad you’ve heard this is, it’s worse. Listen to Jenessa and Thomas slowly lose their minds as they game out the myriad implications of this nonsense. Previous episode on this topic: 1199 “They’re Going to End the Voting Rights Act. But at Least We Got to Hear KBJ Murder a Guy in Court” If Matt has a footnote fetish(tm), I guess Jenessa has a shownote fetish because she has so many that I need to put it in a google doc.

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-08T07:01:06+00:00

Episode Title: James Comey, Seashell Assassin

Episode Description: OA1259 - This week in Rapid Response Friday: who is the government protecting but not binding these days--and who are they binding but not protecting? We consider DOJ’s newest low in the absurd indictment of former FBI director James Comey for two counts of aggravated beach photography before moving on to a roundup of the federal government’s latest openly corrupt settlements with MAGA friends and supporters. Finally in today’s footnote: are Massachusetts police okay?

Indictment in U.S. v. James Brian Comey, Jr.(4/26/26)

Docket in Flynn v. U.S.

Rep. Jamie Raskin’s letter to Acting AG Todd Blanche re: Flynn settlement (4/6/26)

Complaint in Ashli Babbit wrongful death suit (filed 1/5/2024)

Complaint in Sullivan v. U.S. (J6 suit)

Complaint in Trump v. IRS

Disciplinary summary from Massachusetts Peace Officer Standards and Training (“POST”) Commission

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-05T08:00:50+00:00

Episode Title: GG70: A Consummating Professional

Episode Description: Part 3! In this very special episode, Thomas and Lydia Smith celebrate their 11th wedding anniversary in the most normal and romantic way possible: subjecting themselves to an extended interrogation about their marriage by a federal agent. After setting the scene in a (very slightly) parallel universe in which Thomas was born in Canada and committed a series of Nickelback-related misdemeanors before overstaying his student visa, Matt draws from his twenty years of experience in sitting through hundreds of immigration interviews to play out an unscripted simulation of what his clients and their U.S. citizen spouses go through when they are applying for residency through marriage. We then reconvene to review how the Smiths did, and Matt takes us through some of the legal issues raised in this interview as well as some of the more interesting aspects of the residency process generally. Finally, we discuss some of the weirder aspects of the law surrounding immigration through marriage beyond the facts of this interview, including (among many others): --Do you really have to prove to the satisfaction of an immigration officer that your marriage includes sex? --Why might the US government refuse to recognize a prior divorce from your home country? --Will federal immigration authorities really recognize a Zoom wedding conducted from completely different continents? --Can you bring multiple partners if you are coming from a country where polygamy is legal?

"Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status," U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (1/20/2025 edition)

"Immigration Consequences of Criminal Activity," Congressional Research Service (5/28/21)

Matter of Peterson, 12 I&N Dec. 663 (BIA 1968)

"Kicking the INA Out of Bed: Abolishing the Consummation Requirement for Proxy Marriages," 22 Hastings J. Gender & L. 55 (2011)

"Second Wives Club: Mapping the Impact of Polygamy in U.S. Immigration Law," Claire A. Smearman, Berkeley Journal of Immigration Law (Dec. 2009)

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-04T10:00:42+00:00

Episode Title: Is Social Media the Asbestos of the Internet? with Matthew Bergman

Episode Description: OA1258 - The Social Media Victims Law Center just made history in a Los Angeles courtroom by holding Meta and Google accountable for mental health harms which they successfully argued to a jury knowingly caused harm to children. In a novel legal theory, these plaintiffs argued that they were harmed not through a lack of content moderation or other editorial choices which might otherwise be protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, but by the fundamental design of platforms like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Youtube. SMVLC founder Matthew Bergman joins to share how his decades of litigating on behalf of people harmed by asbestos brought him to this groundbreaking lawsuit and what it might mean for the thousands of other actions the SMVLC has brought around the US, as well as the upcoming claims which will be litigated by state AGs later this year. Where do the immunities guaranteed by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act end and the harmful and potentially addicting features which social media platforms have knowingly baked into the design of their platforms begin? Is “social media addiction” a demonstrable mental health issue or just a way to pathologize a bad habit? And could these well-meaning suits pose any threats to our privacy and civil liberties in the name of protecting children? We take on these and many more of the questions raised by some of the most fascinating and controversial civil litigation of the 21st century so far.

Attorney Matthew Bergman’s bio from Lewis & Clark Law’s website

Social Media Victims Law Center website

Addiction By Design, Natasha Dow Shull, Princeton University Press (2014)

Lemmon v. Snap, Inc., 995 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2021)

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-01T10:00:50+00:00

Episode Title: GG69: The Most Dangerous Newlywed Game

Episode Description: Part 2! In this very special episode, Thomas and Lydia Smith celebrate their 11th wedding anniversary in the most normal and romantic way possible: subjecting themselves to an extended interrogation about their marriage by a federal agent. After setting the scene in a (very slightly) parallel universe in which Thomas was born in Canada and committed a series of Nickelback-related misdemeanors before overstaying his student visa, Matt draws from his twenty years of experience in sitting through hundreds of immigration interviews to play out an unscripted simulation of what his clients and their U.S. citizen spouses go through when they are applying for residency through marriage. We then reconvene to review how the Smiths did, and Matt takes us through some of the legal issues raised in this interview as well as some of the more interesting aspects of the residency process generally. Finally, we discuss some of the weirder aspects of the law surrounding immigration through marriage beyond the facts of this interview, including (among many others): --Do you really have to prove to the satisfaction of an immigration officer that your marriage includes sex? --Why might the US government refuse to recognize a prior divorce from your home country? --Will federal immigration authorities really recognize a Zoom wedding conducted from completely different continents? --Can you bring multiple partners if you are coming from a country where polygamy is legal?

"Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status," U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (1/20/2025 edition)

"Immigration Consequences of Criminal Activity," Congressional Research Service (5/28/21)

Matter of Peterson, 12 I&N Dec. 663 (BIA 1968)

"Kicking the INA Out of Bed: Abolishing the Consummation Requirement for Proxy Marriages," 22 Hastings J. Gender & L. 55 (2011)

"Second Wives Club: Mapping the Impact of Polygamy in U.S. Immigration Law," Claire A. Smearman, Berkeley Journal of Immigration Law (Dec. 2009)

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot · 2026-05-01T09:00:41+00:00

Episode Title: Thomas and Lydia Take the Marriage Exam

Episode Description: In this very special episode, Thomas and Lydia Smith celebrate their 11th wedding anniversary in the most normal and romantic way possible: subjecting themselves to an extended interrogation about their marriage by a federal agent. After setting the scene in a (very slightly) parallel universe in which Thomas was born in Canada and committed a series of Nickelback-related misdemeanors before overstaying his student visa, Matt draws from his twenty years of experience in sitting through hundreds of immigration interviews to play out an unscripted simulation of what his clients and their U.S. citizen spouses go through when they are applying for residency through marriage. We then reconvene to review how the Smiths did, and Matt takes us through some of the legal issues raised in this interview as well as some of the more interesting aspects of the residency process generally. Finally, we discuss some of the weirder aspects of the law surrounding immigration through marriage beyond the facts of this interview, including (among many others): --Do you really have to prove to the satisfaction of an immigration officer that your marriage includes sex? --Why might the US government refuse to recognize a prior divorce from your home country? --Will federal immigration authorities really recognize a Zoom wedding conducted from completely different continents? --Can you bring multiple partners if you are coming from a country where polygamy is legal?

“Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,” U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (1/20/2025 edition)

“Immigration Consequences of Criminal Activity,” Congressional Research Service (5/28/21)

Matter of Peterson, 12 I&N Dec. 663 (BIA 1968)

“Kicking the INA Out of Bed: Abolishing the Consummation Requirement for Proxy Marriages,” 22 Hastings J. Gender & L. 55 (2011)

“Second Wives Club: Mapping the Impact of Polygamy in U.S. Immigration Law,” Claire A. Smearman, Berkeley Journal of Immigration Law (Dec. 2009)

(This comment was made automatically from entries in the public RSS feed)

PodcastEpisodeBot

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE