Opening Arguments Opening Arguments Media LLC

OA1033
We begin with a quick check-in on Trump’s trial in New York, from the recent appellate ruling on his gag order Todd Blanche's bizarrely personal  start to his cross-examination of the most important witness in one of the most important criminal trials in US history. Matt then explains why it might be a felony to run for governor in Washington State if your name is Bob Ferguson. 
Then: Clarence Thomas just rejected an originalist 5th Circuit ruling to save the
Consumer Protection Finance Bureau on behalf of a 7-2 court--with Alito dissenting for totally different originalist reasons. What is going here?
We then stop in for a quick layover with the current state of the Boeing non-prosecution agreement before Thomas takes on a bar question about some extremely unpleasant fish.
Unanimous order from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York upholding Trump NY gag order (5/14/24)
RCW 29A.84.320 (WA criminal statute addressing “Duplicate, nonexistent, and untrue names”)
SCOTUS ruling in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Assn. of America, Ltd. (05/16/2024)
DOJ letter to court overseeing Boeing nonprosecution agreement (5/14/24) There's a new episode out on www.patreon.com/gavelpod!
If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1032
We're very pleased to welcome Steve Vladeck on the show to talk about what's going on with the Supreme Court these days, and how shadowy their docket has been recently. We then dig into (and debate a touch) a recent piece he wrote regarding a different way to conceptualize about court reform, and what he personally sees as viable and appropriate among the various proposals for change.
Be sure to read The Shadow Docket, which will be released on paperback soon, and subscribe to One First to get more of Steve's great coverage!
Then we reveal the answer to last episode's T3BE; did Thomas successfully determine the fate of Rebecca the violinist? And who from the audience will be the lucky winner?!
Remember to head over to www.patreon.com/gavelpod to follow our Trump Trial coverage ahead of the public release of the show!
If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1031
First up, BIG ANNOUNCEMENTS!!! The Trump Trial Transcript readings will now only be available on patreon.com/gavelpod! Details inside.
Then: the Biden administration is moving forward with rescheduling marijuana to a lower federal classification--and Matt is not happy about it? Find out why this long-overdue acknowledgment of the over-criminalization of cannabis may not only be too little too late, but actually the wrong direction for criminal and social justice.
And speaking of justice gone wrong: Aileen Cannon. Fort Pierce, Florida’s best (and only) federal trial judge has once again put off Trump’s classified documents case, this time with no end in sight. We take a closer look at what she is actually doing here before checking in on Trump’s latest success in delaying his RICO trial for election interference in Georgia.
We finish up with Thomas Takes the Bar Exam, in which Thomas  find out how he did in the strange case of the arsonist who doesn't understand how fire works before wagering his eternal soul on a new question about a sick violinist.
Formal HHS recommendation that cannabis be moved to Schedule III (8/29/23)
“Legalize it All,” Dan Baum, Harper’s (April 2016)(source of 1994 John Ehrlichman quote as personally recorded by the author)
Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005)
The Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act (2022 Senate bill removing marijuana from federal drug schedules and putting it under FDA regulation reintroduced by Chuck Schumer on 5/1/2024)
Judge Cannon’s Order Setting Second Set of Pretrial Deadlines/Hearings (5/7/24)
If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1030: Trump Trial, Week 2, Part 2!
This episode centers around David Pecker's testimony and it's basically rock solid. Trump's attorneys are desperate, so Mr. Bove goes for the juggler! And then everyone has to explain it's actually "jugular" why in the world would you go for the "juggler?" Why would that be the idiom? In what world are jugglers like, crucial components of anything, at which you would want to go in order to really hurt someone or something? Maybe at circuses? They're arguably not even that important to circuses though, don't they just mess around in between way better acts to try to distract the audience a little?
I just want to assure people that Matt had nothing to do with these show notes. He hasn't had a stroke or anything, don't worry. It's just that I, Thomas, now answer to NO ONE when it comes to Opening Arguments because.... SURPRISE SHOW NOTES ANNOUNCEMENT Andrew is completely out of OA! The legal bull shit is over! More details inside!
If you would like to audition to read transcripts on the show in the future, go to https://openargs.com/audition and follow the directions there!
If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1029: Trump Trial, Week 2, Part 1!
Lordy, there are tapes! Our special coverage of People v. Trump continues, now with readings from Juilliard-trained, Tony-winning actors Thomas and Lydia Smith! (none of that is true except possibly our names.)
Donald Trump is now the first U.S. President ever to be held in contempt of court. Exactly how criminal is "criminal contempt" in New York, and what does this mean for the rest of the trial? Also, Matt takes us on a fascinating mini-dive on the National Enquirer. It has a very interesting history you might not be familiar with. Then start getting into the trial fireworks. Much more to come! Probably at least 3 parts.
1) People v. Trump Transcripts
2) Justice Merchan's contempt order
3) AMI non-prosecution agreement
If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Episode 1028
Can a former President of the United States be prosecuted for trying to overturn a democratic election? The Supreme Court just spent two hours and forty minutes (!) hearing a case in which they were supposed to be reviewing this simple question and Donald Trump’s claims of total immunity. We review the last oral argument of this term and try to cut through the bad faith, irrelevance, and misdirection to understand what is actually happening here and where it all might be going.
DC Trump indictment (8/1/23)
Government’s brief in Trump v. U.S
Trump’s brief in Trump v. U.S.
CSPAN’S complete bookmarked SCOTUS oral arguments in Trump v. U.S. (4/25/24)
If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!