OpenArgsWiki

August 22, 2019

Listen to the Episode

Guest

• Guest Name

From The Official Website:

Today’s Rapid Response Friday breaks down a just-released decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit that has produced a ton of alarming media. Is that alarm warranted? (No.) What did the court actually decide, and how will it affect the 2020 Presidential Election? And what does any of this have to do with Lawrence Lessig?? Listen and find out!

We begin, however, with a grab-bag of questions arising out of Episode 307 on apportionment and revisit an issue that Andrew predicts will hang over the next Presidency. Are there any “quick fixes” to the problem or are we destined to be hung up in litigation?

Then, it’s time for our deep dive into Baca v. Colorado, understanding (a) how this case came about, (b) what it says, and (c) what the implications are for the 2020 Presidential election. Is it some crazy ruling in favor of Trump? What’s “the saddest Hamilton?” Listen and find out!

After that, it’s time for a quick update on the emoluments clause litigation, this time examining a recent ruling by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. What’s the future for individual lawsuits against the President? (Hint: it’s not good.)

And then it’s time for a brand-new banana law-themed #T3BE! Will this slip-and-fall question be enough to get Thomas back in the win column? Listen, and then play along!

Show Notes & Links

1. Check out Laurence Tribe’s “Optimist Prime” article in the [Raw Story].
2. For more on apportionment, you can read 2 U.S.C. § 2a and catch up on Franklin v. Massachusetts, 505 U.S. 788 (1992), the controlling Supreme Court precedent.
3. Click here to read the 10th Circuit’s decision in Baca, and for an example of unwarranted freakout over the Bacadecision, check out this wildly-misleading NBC article.
4. If you love the deep dive, don’t forget to refresh your memory by re-reading Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (1939).
5. We last updated you on emoluments in Episode 299 and in this fabulous Patreon-only bonus. You can also check out the latest DC ruling.

Law Talkin' Stuff

Earth Law

• International treaties and laws mentioned

It's in the Constitution

• Proposed 1924 Child Labor Amendment

Lawsplaining

• 2usc-2a Subsection B

Law Court Thingies

• coleman-v-miller

Magic Law Words

• Apportionment
• Faithless Electors
• Federalist Papers
• Mandamus relief
• Standing

Organizations

• US District Court for the District of Colorado
• kansas-supreme-court
• Supreme Court of the United States
• Tenth Circuit

People

• Alexander Hamilton
• Donald Trump
• John Kasich
• Laurence Tribe
• Lawrence Lessig

References

• Negatron
• Optimist Prime
• Yodel Mountain

Topics

• Apportionment
• Emoluments
• Faithless Electors

Content

• [00:00:00] Intro
• [00:06:13] Listener Questions Apportionments questions: Four one weird tricks to stop apportionment (that won't work)
• [00:23:46] Commercial
• [00:25:24] Second Segment Faithless Electors decision
  • [00:27:45] The Partisan Argument (Legal Realism)
  • [00:32:36] The 2016 Kasich 37 plan
  • [00:36:54] Federalist Papers #68
  • [00:41:32] The lawsuits
  • [00:43:53] The basis for Standing
  • [00:53:39] Crazy headlines and the actual bottom line
• [00:57:50] Commercial
• [01:00:01] Lightning Round Emoluments
• [01:06:23] Patron Hall of Fame
• [01:14:47] Thomas Takes the Bar Exam question: Banana law
• [01:19:56] Outro

(The time stamps above are derived from the audio provided on the official website; they may vary from audio without ads that are provided through the patreon feed.)