March 12, 2018

Listen to the Episode


From The Official Website:

Today’s episode tackles a popular article in The Atlantic which implies that, but for the machinations of one dude in the 1880s, corporations might not be “people,” today. Is it true? Listen and find out!

First, though, we continue to examine the legal genius of Stormy Daniels by answering some of the most common questions raised in response to our episode. This begins (sadly) with a brief “Andrew Was Wrong” clarification about the operative campaign disclosure requirements as well as an analysis of the arbitration order that came to light just after we went to press with Episode 154, and more!

In the main segment, Andrew takes a trip through the history of corporate personhood. After that, we answer a delightful question about hearsay from listener Dr. Jeff Otjen.

Finally, we end with the answer to Thomas (and David) Take the Bar Exam Question #66 about murderous political candidates appearing on an “Iron Chef” knockoff… look, you’ll just have to listen for yourself.

Show Notes & Links

  1. We first discussed the Stormy Daniels lawsuit (and linked her complaint) back in Episode 154. Since then, Susan Simpson has done some pretty top-notch investigative work as to where the Trump campaign may have hid the payoff to Stormy.
  2. The case referred to in the “A” segment is Amendariz v. Foundation Health, 6 P.3d 669 (Cal. 2000).
  3. Our main segment discusses Adam Winker’s article in The Atlantic, focusing on Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific R.R. Co., 118 U.S. 394 (1886).
  4. Finally, the answer to Dr. Jeff’s question references two different provisions of the Federal Rules of Evidence: Rule 801 (defining hearsay) and Rule 803 (listing the exceptions).

Law Talkin' Stuff

It's in the Constitution
Law Court Thingies
Magic Law Words






  • [00:00:00] Intro
  • [00:05:03] Andrew was Wrong: When you are running for federal office then the federal law preempt states disclosure requirements
  • [00:17:00] Arbitration Award
    • [00:26:40] Grounds for Overturning an Arbitration Award
    • [00:30:20] Amendariz v. Foundation Health
    • [00:31:10] Is the Arbitration Clause one sided?
    • [00:35:20] Why this is not the same as Bill Clinton
  • [00:41:05] Adam Winker’s article in The Atlantic
    • [00:42:00] Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific R.R. Co.
    • [00:48:50] Louisville, Cincinnati & Charleston R. Co. v. Letson
    • [00:49:30] Corporation rights and the 14th Amendment
  • [00:57:04] Listener Questions: Federal Rules of Evidence and Hearsay
    • [01:01:45] Hersey Rule Exceptions
    • [01:06:20] Rule 803 (6)
  • [01:10:50] New Patron Tuesday
  • [01:11:42] Thomas Takes The Bar Exam: Stabbing Death of a Rival Candidate (answer)
  • [01:18:55] Outro
  • [01:20:18] Out-takes

Follow up