Category: 3-LawSometimeCommentary

Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code OPENING at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: http://incogni.com/opening

OA1142 and T3BE64 - The State Bar of California wanted to save a buck or two, so they switched from paying a company to administer a real bar exam to a company that... didn't do that. It's an absolute fiasco. Heather is pulling double duty today on Wildcard Wednesday (tm) as she is our expert on this nonsense, in addition to giving us the usual Thomas Takes the Bar Exam treatment!

If you'd like to play along with T3BE, here's what to do: hop on Bluesky, follow Openargs, find the post that has this episode, and quote it with your answer! Or, go to our Subreddit and look for the appropriate T3BE posting.

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

On February 21, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in Williams v. Reed. The Court held that state courts may not deny those claims on failure-to-exhaust grounds when a state court’s application of a state exhaustion requirement in effect immunizes state officials from 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims challenging delays in the administrative process.
Please join us in discussing the decision and its future implications.

Featuring:
Prof. Tyler Lindley, Associate Professor of Law, Brigham Young University J. Reuben Clark Law School

OA1141 - Are Republican AGs really trying to have some of the most important federal protections for disability rights declared unconstitutional? Attorney Jenessa Seymour joins to explain the history and purpose of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the pending challenge to a Biden-era regulatory update intended to protect trans health care rights. 

• Texas v. Becerra docket

• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

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!

After a deep dive on the Trump administration’s horrifying misuse of the Alien Enemies Act to deport people from the US without due process, Kate and Leah preview upcoming SCOTUS cases about the Voting Rights Act and the Environmental Protection Agency. Along the way, they also touch on the Trump administration’s targeting of certain law firms and its continued attacks on DEI. 

Hosts’ favorite things this week: 

• Leah: Fight! Fight! Fight!, Rebecca Traister; AOC’s Bluesky feed during the CR debates/debacle; The Hidden Motive Behind Trump’s Attacks on Trans People, M. Gessen; This Election Will Be a Crucial Test of Musk’s Power, Kate Shaw; Trump Has Gone From Unconstitutional to Anti-Constitutional, Jamelle Bouie
• Kate: The Feminist Law Professor Who Wants to Stop Arresting People for Domestic Violence, Sarah Lustbader; The Dangerous Document Behind Trump’s Campus Purges, Daphna Renan & Jesse  Hoffnung-Garskof; The Cost of the Government’s Attack on Columbia, Christopher L. Eisgruber

Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 

• 6/12 – NYC
• 10/4 – Chicago

Learn more: http://crooked.com/events

Order your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes

Follow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky

If you’re overwhelmed by the sheer volume of lawless acts, constitutional crises (we count five), and huge Trump administration losses in court this week - honestly, same. But if anyone can render this swirling storm of lawsuits and orders and injunctions legible, and put them in terms that can help make sense of this moment, it’s Dahlia Lithwick. On this week’s show, Dahlia is first joined by Quinta Jurecic, a fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution and a senior editor at Lawfare, to discuss the deeply worrying shift in the Trump regime’s posture toward judges and the rule of law, that’s been playing out inside and outside the courts this week. Next, Dahlia speaks with a lawyer who secured a big win against Elon Musk and DOGE this week in one of the USAID cases. Mimi Marziani explains the litigation strategy, and its limits.  

Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you’ll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

OA1140 - The Trump administration has openly defied a court order--and that’s only the third worst thing about today’s main story. Also: what exactly does it mean to “sign” something into law? What is actually in all of these articles of impeachment which Republicans keep filing against federal judges who have defied Trump? And is there a First Amendment right to communicate with monkeys?

• 50 USC Ch. 3: ALIEN ENEMIES

• Invocation of the Alien Enemies Act Regarding the Invasion of The United States by Tren De Aragua, March 15, 2025 (3:53 PM)

• Docket in J.G.G. v. Trump (filed 3/15/25)

• Articles of Impeachment filed against Judge James Boasberg by Rep. Brandon Gill (3/18/25)

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!

On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers Inc. The Court held that in a trademark infringement suit under the Lanham Act the court, when awarding the "defendant’s profits" to the prevailing plaintiff, can award only profits ascribable to the "defendant" itself.

Please join us in discussing the decision and its future implications.
Featuring:

Prof. Jake Linford, Loula Fuller & Dan Myers Professor and Associate Dean for Research, Florida State University College of Law

OA1139 and T3BE63 - Lydia's back this week to walk us through Trump's very fashy takeover of The Kennedy Center. She watched it unfold in real-time and while it is obviously disturbing, listening to some leaked audio from the first board meeting provides a lot of laughs. It's somehow real, folks.

And we've got Professor Heather Varanini as always to walk us through the answer to T3BE62, and to set up the question for T3BE63!

If you'd like to play along with T3BE, here's what to do: hop on Bluesky, follow Openargs, find the post that has this episode, and quote it with your answer! Or, go to our Subreddit and look for the appropriate t3BE posting. Or best of all, become a patron at patreon.com/law and play there!

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!

President Trump has been firing various Federal officials, many of whom serve pursuant to statutes that claim to provide protection against firing without cause.  One of the most prominent, Hampton Dellinger, who served as Special Counsel of the United States, took the President to Court, winning at the Federal District Court before losing on appeal.  Why did he sue?  Why did he drop his case? What are the implications for the other firings being contested, and what does it mean for the office of the Special Counsel itself? The Special Counsel is a haven for whistleblowers; does that, along with the statutes’ clear intent, offer him any protection? The Special Counsel also enforces the Hatch Act; we explain many of the ins and outs of that statute and how the history of the civil service is integral to understanding it.  Finally, Hampton Dellinger comes from a most distinguished family, and there are some stories to tell on that score.  CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges from podcast.njsba.com.

In this urgent extra episode of Amicus,  host Dahlia Lithwick and Slate's senior writer Mark Joseph Stern discuss the unfolding constitutional crisis triggered by the Trump administration's defiance of a court order to halt flights carrying Venezuelan migrants to be delivered to El Salvador’s so-called Terrorism Confinement Center - a vast foreign prison  that could  be described as a labor camp.  Lithwick and Stern explore the timeline of events that unfolded in Federal Court Judge James Boasberg’s court this week, and on planes bound for El Salvador. Next, they try to parse the legal arguments put forth by the Justice Department, claiming apparently boundless power for President Trump to render anyone he deems a gang member. Finally, they discuss why the Trump administration has chosen this particular constitutional hill to die on, and how far Chief Justice John Roberts might be prepared to go along with it. 

This episode is member-exclusive. Listen to it now by subscribing to Slate Plus. By joining, not only will you unlock weekly bonus episodes of Amicus—you’ll also access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices