Month: <span>February 2024</span>
Month: February 2024

First Amendment Fundamentals

Episode # 72
Today on Legalese, I have a different sort of video than usual, born out a recent request from a subscriber who asked me if I could put something together that will explore the meaning of the terms “Forums” and “Reasonable” specifically as those terms relate to first amendment jurisprudence. So that is exactly what this is.
Enjoy!

Follow & Support
Subscribe To Legalese Newsletter – https://legaleseshow.com/
Legalese Homepage – https://www.legalesepodcast.com/
“Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers” Now Available on Amazon – https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BN93R9QX

Contact Me – Bob@legaleseshow.com

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in politics and other areas of law.

The First Amendment On Trial

Episode # 71
On Monday February 26th, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in two landmark cases dealing with the First Amendment and social media. These cases challenge the constitutionality of two laws passed in Texas and Florida that seek to control how social media sites may moderate their own content.

These laws are obvious affronts to the first amendment.

The cases in question are Moody v Netchoice and Netchoice v Paxton. We briefly covered these cases back in October in my preliminary Supreme Court Roundup video. These are the second set (of three total sets) of cases that will have major consequences for the relationship between social media companies and the first amendment moving forward.

In this video we go over the facts of the case as well as their procedural history so that when they are argued before the court you will have the kind of comprehensive background knowledge of these laws and the cases challenging their constitutionality to understand them and follow their further development.

Follow & Support
Subscribe To Legalese Newsletter – https://legaleseshow.com/
Legalese Homepage – https://www.legalesepodcast.com/
“Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers” Now Available on Amazon – https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BN93R9QX

Contact Me – Bob@legaleseshow.com

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in politics and other areas of law.

Texas Border Crisis: What Democrats Get Wrong

Episode # 70
There are few issues more partisan and controversial than the immigration issue. And where you find controversial issues, you find all manner of bullshit, half-truths, politically biased reporting and false narratives.

While I am not interested in, nor do I intend to discuss the immigration issue as a policy matter, there is one sense in which I do want to discuss it. That is as a legal matter. Because there is a pending immigration case right now you have probably heard of — Department Of Homeland Security v Texas. As is to be expected, there is no shortage of false narratives and melodramatics surrounding this case on all sides of the issue. So I am going to be taking on some outrageously biased legal arguments regarding this case and it’s subject matter. Breaking through the hard outer shell of lies, to get to the ripe, juicy truth at the center.
This is the second and final installment of this series. In the first video we focused on Republican disinformation regarding the meaning of the Constitution and the powers they claim it grants them in dealing with illegal immigration. Today’s video will be examining the Democrat’s response to Texas actions and claims and it is apparent that twisting the meaning of the law and of the Constitution to suit a partisan political argument is not a trat Republican have a monopoly on.
We find renowned journalist and distinguished legal scholars telling obvious and blatant lies about Governor Greg Abbot and the State of Texas, regarding a recent Supreme Court order relating to the pending case Department of Homeland Security v Texas that’s currently being adjudicated in the Fifth Circuit.

Follow & Support
Subscribe To Legalese Newsletter – https://legaleseshow.com/
Legalese Homepage – https://www.legalesepodcast.com/
“Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers” Now Available on Amazon – https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BN93R9QX

Contact Me – Bob@legaleseshow.com

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in politics and other areas of law.

Texas Border Crisis – What Everyone Gets Wrong About DHS v Texas

Episode #
There are few issues more partisan and controversial than the immigration issue. And where you find controversial issues, you find all manner of bullshit, half-truths, politically biased reporting and false narratives.
While I am not interested in, nor do I intend to discuss the immigration issue as a policy matter, there is one sense in which I want to discuss it as a legal matter. Because there is a pending immigration case right now you have probably heard of. DHS v Texas. And just as you would expect there is no shortage of false narratives and melodramatics surrounding this case on all sides of the issue. So I am going to be taking one outrageous politically biased legal argument from Republicans, as well as one from the Democrats regarding this case and we will be breaking them down to get to the truth of the matter.

Follow & Support
Subscribe To Legalese Newsletter – https://legaleseshow.com/
Legalese Homepage – https://www.legalesepodcast.com/
“Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers” Now Available on Amazon – https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BN93R9QX

Contact Me – Bob@legaleseshow.com

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in politics and other areas of law.

Chevron Is Dead, Long Live Chevron

Episode #68
Today on Legalese we are talking about the death of the Chevron Doctrine. On January 17th, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Relentless Inc. v Department Of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo.
These two cases are asking whether or not the Court should overrule the Chevron Doctrine, which holds a court should defer to the judgement of an administrative agency in their interpretation of a statute if the statute is ambiguous or if Congress has been silent on the propriety of a particular interpretation of a law.
While I have maintained for the last several years, ever since I first started following and discussing the Loper Bright case, that we will not see the Court actually stepping up and overruling Chevron as a result of these cases. I now believe that is exactly what will happen.
While no one ever likes having to admit they are wrong…. This is one instance where I could not be happier to be able to say that I was mistaken.
Following oral arguments it seems perfectly clear that the Court is preparing to overrule the Chevron Doctrine. Today we discuss why I believe that is the most logical and probable outcome in this case.
I also discuss why I had been so skeptical of this potential outcome and we do a deep dive into the oral arguments to highlight precisely why and how my opinion on the matter has completely shifted.
We also discuss the history of Chevron Deference and the background of these two cases. We also spend some time exploring the future of the administrative state in a world without Chevron and why this change will leave all three branches of government better equipped to fulfill their actual constitutional duties.

Follow & Support
Subscribe To Legalese Newsletter – https://legaleseshow.com/
Legalese Homepage – https://www.legalesepodcast.com/
“Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers” Now Available on Amazon – https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BN93R9QX

Contact Me – Bob@legaleseshow.com

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in politics and other areas of law.

Verified by MonsterInsights