Opening Arguments Podcast

After Dershowitz Dustup, Islanders Line Up for Pierogi Hundreds of people attended the West Tisbury Farmers’ Market this week to show support for the pierogi vendor who refused to sell dumplings to prominent attorney Alan Dershowitz.

"Hundreds of people attended the West Tisbury Farmers’ Market this week to show support for the pierogi vendor who refused to sell dumplings to prominent attorney Alan Dershowitz at the market last week."

• I, Krem, am Jewish. Members of my immediate family live in Israel. I love Shabbat and baking challah. My friends call me "Rabbi Krem", and I have personal relationships with both Rabbis on island. • We are proud co-owners of a Martha's Vineyard business that deeply values its relationships with its partners, vendors, collaborators, and most importantly, its clientele. • We are a minority-owned (LGBTQ+) operation. Krem is non-binary and uses they/them pronouns. • Prior to this incident, Good Pierogi had never refused service to anybody. • We stand against those who harm or seek to harm others as well as those that would defend them. • Finally, we don't back down to bullies - no matter their size.

The level of effort Mr. Dershowitz is investing in this charade has led us to a singular conclusion: Our handcrafted pierogi, made with love from locally sourced ingredients, are so undeniably delicious, he'll do anything to get his hands on them. (Smiley face emoji.)

The chef-owner of Good Pierogi on Alan Dershowitz: "Our handcrafted pierogi, made with love from locally sourced ingredients, are so undeniably delicious, he'll do anything to get his hands on them."

Vital followup to today's Patreon bonus video from one of our new favorite Massholes on why Alan Dershowitz doesn't deserve to eat his tasty pierogi

We have a solid starting lineup for this series planned, but please share your favorite lesser-appreciated Warren Court decisions here for future consideration (or just because)

#lawsky

There is a very good reason that "impeach Earl Warren" was a standard talking point for many of those years

coming in the next few months (among many other things):

-Cincinnati v Coates and your Constitutional right to be annoying in public

-how hundreds of pages of science persuaded the court to desegregate

-The most important case LGBTQ rights ithat you'Ve never heard of

We are really excited to bring you this new regular series on our favorite decisions from the Warren Court era! It feels important in this moment to remember a better time when the court properly considered the best outcomes for real people, and to remember that we can get there again

High Priest of LSD" Dr. Timothy Leary might be the most famous person not named Donald Trump to bring his criminal case before the US Supreme Court. @jenessaseymour.bsky.social brings her unique background to discuss this surprisingly little-known moment in US drug policy
podbay.fm/p/opening-ar...

I listened to this the same day as @openargs.bsky.social's two part interview with progressive prosecutor Chesa Boudin came out. It was interesting to see decarceration taken from the top down and bottom up, and I'd recommend listening to both.

pca.st/episode/4ad4...

This was a fun one! Come to satisfy your curiosity about what we look like, stay for the gumballs. You really don't want to miss the gumballs

YouTube video by Opening Arguments Alan Dershowitz tries to pull a literal "nothing to see here" on Epstein

On today's first-ever Vapid Response Wednesday: (1) Epstein lawyer/alleged conspirator Alan Dershowitz would like you to know that there is literally "nothing to see here" and (2) immigration hardliner Roy Beck builds a giant strawman entirely out of gumballs

youtu.be/zCFQsgsbZnI?...

Judge Trina Thompson cited comments from Noem and others comparing TPS holders — who have lawful status — to criminals and people in the country illegally. She said Noem's comments seemed to espouse replacement theory. "Color is neither a poison nor a crime" storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

"likely"

T3BE78: Following the Interpleader Podcast Episode · Opening Arguments · Ep78 Bonus · 44m

Episode: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/o...

Question 78 of Thomas Takes The Bar Exam is as follows: Elsa was a single woman with a life insurance policy that pays her designated beneficiary $74,000 upon her death. She tragically died in a boating accident. Her ex-boyfriend, Anthony, was a resident of Arkansas and named as beneficiary. But her mother Mary, a resident of California, also filed a claim for the life insurance proceeds. The insurance company, a Delaware corporation having its principal place of business in California, filed an interpleader action in federal court to protect itself from potentially inconsistent and multiple claims. May the insurance company bring the interpleader action in federal court? A. No, because there is no federal court where the insurance company will be able to establish personal jurisdiction over both claimants. B. No, because the insurance company is not diverse from one of the claimants. C. No, because the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000 and there is no diversity between the insurance company and one of the claimants. D. Yes, because the amount in controversy is $500 or more, and both claimants are diverse from one another.

Tragedy strikes again in this week's #T3BE (quote skeet to play) and I don't know about you, but I'm not buying this "boating accident" story. Anthony definitely did it.

Was listening to @openargs.bsky.social & solidarity to @mattcameron.bsky.social who has been having an awful week.

They can detain anyone in US and it will be up to them or their family to get birth cert or whatever to prove they are a citizen.

Truly the fourth reich is here.

Deine papieren bitte

Appreciate the detail on the inferred, uh, "reasoning" of the memo on the podcast.

Fwiw, filings by DHS & brief ODLS listings have offered less ridiculous names for this new FL camp ("TNT Detention Facility" & "Florida Soft-Sided Facility-South", respectively) than these dumb state officials have.

This one's a behemoth (I had to type out the alt text manually). The text of T3BE Question 77 is as follows: Winnie was on her way to meet her husband, Herb, for lunch at the restaurant adjacent to the bookstore where he worked. Winnie had just entered the building, which was owned and operated by the bookstore, when she heard the sound of breaking glass and screams. A big chandelier that was hanging in the restaurant fell into the waiting area. Winnie saw several injured people in the waiting area, including her husband who was lying in the wreckage of the chandelier. When she saw her husband, Winnie fainted and hit her foot on an umbrella stand, breaking the bones in her foot. The chandelier fell because the fastener that the bookstore used to secure it to the ceiling was loose. If Winnie sues the bookstore for her injury, is she likely to prevail? The answer choices, included by popular demand are as follows: A. Yes, because her husband was one of the people she saw lying in the wreckage. B. Yes, because the bookstore used the fastener for the chandelier. C. No, because she was not personally in the zone of danger of physical injury D. No, because she did not actually see the chandelier collapse onto the diners.

We interrupt our regular coverage of The Horrors with a #T3BE (quote skeet to play) question about The Hypothetical Horrors. I wonder if the person who came up with this debacle is a Phantom fan. Episode: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/t...

I'm of two minds about this: one one hand, it's great that people seem to be rejecting Stephen Miller-ism. On the other hand, it fundamentally sucks that the American populace is basically the Itchy & Scratchy focus group

Sadly no, it was never easy but is now all but impossible to sue federal law enforcement for things they say about you in public

Washington bishops sue state over new mandatory reporting law Bishops defend the sacred seal of confession against a new law in a lawsuit.

Listening to @professorvaranini.bsky.social on @openargs.bsky.social today and had an "ooh, I know that one!" moment: It's Washington State who passed a law making clergy mandatory reporters (SB 5375) and now we're being sued by Catholic bishops...and the Trump admin.

www.king5.com/article/news...

WORKIN' IN THE DARK 'GAINST YOUR FELLOW MAN DHS runs on

"...and as I kept watching I realized: this *is* a trailer, and it is for the horror movie that we are all about to live in."

HAPPENING NOW: Judge Xinis comes in hot this morning after DOJ fails to produce the ICE detainer to keep Kilmar Abrego Garcia locked up.

She won't take DOJ's word for it that it exists.

"You have taken the presumption of regularity and you’ve destroyed it in my view," she says.

Question 76 of Thomas Takes The Bar Exam: A driver and a passenger were involved in a car accident. Shortly thereafter, the passenger wrote a summary of the events surrounding the accident in a journal entry. At trial three years later, the passenger is on the stand and unable to accurately recall the details of the accident, even after reviewing his written summary about the accident from his journal. Assuming a proper foundation is laid, may the summary of the accident be read into evidence?

#T3BE (quote skeet to play) is back in business with your weekly shot to be admitted to the Bluesky Bar, have at it! Episode: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/t...

A picture of top DOJ enforcer Emil Bove's face edited into the black cloak of a Death Eater from Harry Potter with the Dark Mark, a black tattoo skull with a snake, visible on his forearm. In the background is the audience of his Senate confirmation hearing for a judgeship on the Third Circuit Appeals Court. The text next to his head reads "emil bove: i am not anyone's henchman" and then "also emil bove:" to emphasize that he is, in fact, a henchman for Trump the way Death Eaters are henchmen for Voldemort. There is also text from a 2018 email complaint about him reading "He's always looking for leverage and power" and "Everything he does seems to be vindictive".

With the same background of the confirmation hearing, this side of the collage includes text of DOJ whistleblower Erez Reuveni's letter reading "Bove stated that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts "fuck you" and ignore any such court order" and Trump with Voldemort's snake nose touching Bove's Dark Mark with his wand.

Olivia's contribution to this list is "Emil A. Bove The Law" and this picture of him as a Death Eater. JK Rowling is dead to us but the cloak and the Dark Mark just capture his vibe so well. Also noseless Trump. Step back from the SCOTUS news with some fun: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/n...

And no that is absolutely not how you are "supposed" to pronounce it, but *you* try making a single clever title with the correct pronunciation

Photo of Principal Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove

Alternate titles for this week's Rapid Response Friday:

BOVE ALL DAY
NO WAY BOVE
PRAY THE BOVE AWAY
BOVE COMPUTER
AS BOVE, SO BELOW
DO CRIMES, BE BOVE
TAKING THE EASY BOVE OUT
BOH-VEYYYYY BOH-VEY BOH-VEY

Question 75 of Thomas Takes The Bar Exam is as follows: Joe was a farmer who grew lettuce on his farm. He conveyed 50 acres of his property "To my sister, her heirs, and assigns, so long as the premises are used for agricultural purposes." What is Joe's interest in the 50 acres as a result of the conveyance?

Good news: #T3BE (quote skeet to play) is up and full of lettuce jokes. Bad news: It's a real property question. Try your hand at Stardew Valley law. Episode: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/t...

"being deprived of the right not to be deported to a country likely to torture or kill you plainly counts" as a "grievous loss" notes, and I'm sorry but I really have to stress this, THE DISSENTING OPINION