Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments Media LLC
  • 0.0 (0)
  • POLITICS
  • UPDATED TWICE WEEKLY

Opening Arguments is a law show that helps you make sense of the news! Comedian Thomas Smith brings on legal analysts to help you understand not only current events, but also deeper legal concepts and areas! The typical schedule will be M-W-F with Monday being a deep-dive, Wednesday being Thomas Takes the Bar Exam and patron shoutouts, and Friday being a rapid response to legal issues in the news!

  1. 3 DAYS AGO

    Is Social Media the Asbestos of the Internet? with Matthew Bergman

    OA1258 - The Social Media Victims Law Center just made history in a Los Angeles courtroom by holding Meta and Google accountable for mental health harms which they successfully argued to a jury knowingly caused harm to children. In a novel legal theory, these plaintiffs argued that they were harmed not through a lack of content moderation or other editorial choices which might otherwise be protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, but by the fundamental design of platforms like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Youtube. SMVLC founder Matthew Bergman joins to share how his decades of litigating on behalf of people harmed by asbestos brought him to this groundbreaking lawsuit and what it might mean for the thousands of other actions the SMVLC has brought around the US, as well as the upcoming claims which will be litigated by state AGs later this year. Where do the immunities guaranteed by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act end and the harmful and potentially addicting features which social media platforms have knowingly baked into the design of their platforms begin? Is “social media addiction” a demonstrable mental health issue or just a way to pathologize a bad habit? And could these well-meaning suits pose any threats to our privacy and civil liberties in the name of protecting children? We take on these and many more of the questions raised by some of the most fascinating and controversial civil litigation of the 21st century so far. Attorney Matthew Bergman’s bio from Lewis & Clark Law’s website Social Media Victims Law Center website Addiction By Design, Natasha Dow Shull, Princeton University Press (2014) Lemmon v. Snap, Inc., 995 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2021) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

    43 min

  2. 27 APR

    When You Oppose War, But Not Religiously

    OA1256 - Will there ever be a draft again? Who knows. But if there is, what does one have to do to claim "conscientious objector” status? During the Vietnam War, the Supreme Court grappled with how to apply that explicitly religious statutory exemption to people whose modern beliefs don’t seem to fit the religious mold that Congress defined in the 40s. Jenessa walks us through the court’s mental gymnastics to avoid ever admitting that anyone could be an atheist, and the concurrence that calls it out. Note: The analysis of the Free Exercise Clause in this episode is specific to the time period of these cases. It got more complicated in the 90s (see sources below). United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965). Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333 (1970). Military Selective Service Act 50 U.S.C.App. § 456(j) Roger M. Sanborn, The Anti-War Movement and the Seeger Decision, 6 Santa Clara Lawyer 230 (1965). Kali Martin, (October 16, 2020), Alternative Service: Conscientious Objectors and Civilian Public Service in World War II, The National WWII Museum. Albert Q. Maisel, (May 6, 1946), Bedlam: Most US Mental Hospitals are a Shame and a Disgrace, Life Magazine at 102-118. Reproduction (without the old-timey ads or graphic photos) Original LIFE publication (CW: Graphic photos of abuse of patients in mental health hospitals) Quaker FAQ. Friends United Meeting. Karlo Broussard, What is a ‘Just War’?, Catholic Answers. Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962) 1963: Even facially-neutral generally-applicable laws have to pass strict scrutiny if they burden the free exercise of religion Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) 1990: Never mind it’s rational basis Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) 1993: Just kidding it’s strict scrutiny again Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb 1997: Just kidding that only applies to the federal government City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997) 2000: Nope it’s strict scrutiny for state and local government again (well… if it relates to land use or prisons) Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc For a summary: Cassandra M. Vogel, An Unveiling: Exploring the Constitutionality of a Ban on Face Coverings in Public Schools, 78 Brook L. Rev. (2013). Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

    1hr 7min

  3. 20 APR

    An Under-the-Radar Copyright Case with Huge Implications

    OA1254 - An underreported on case called Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment could be a much bigger deal than it seems. Record labels say Cox let repeat infringers run wild on its network and a jury hit them with a massive verdict. Cox says it’s not the internet police and shouldn’t be on the hook for what users do. So how far does that responsibility go? When does “you could have stopped this” turn into legal liability? We break down the DMCA’s “repeat infringer” rules and why this case isn’t just about piracy. The real question is whether companies can be forced to cut people off or redesign their services to prevent misuse and where that logic stops. If failing to stop wrongdoing makes you liable here, what does that mean for platforms, payment processors, or even industries like gun sales where the argument is also “you should have done more”? Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

    53 min

  4. 17 APR

    Trump Puts the “Pervert” in Perversion of Justice

    OA1253 - It’s spring cleaning time in this week’s news, in which we answer patron questions on everything from DOJ lying to a federal judge about ICE’s policy on arresting immigrants in courthouses to DOJ lying about violating court orders. Also: the Trump administration’s unbelievable gift to some of the worst of the worst J6rs, the D.C. Circuit’s inexplicable termination of Judge Boasberg’s contempt proceedings against the administration for violating his orders, and a major ruling in one of the most important deportation cases in US history. We chase these shots of 200-proof reality out with a chaser: Did the 5th Circuit really just legalize bathtub gin?  Find out in today’s boozy footnote! “DOJ admits ICE courthouse arrests relied on erroneous information,”  Sergio Martinez-Beltran (NPR, 3/26/2026) Email in which ICE revised its policy to exclude arrests at immigration court, filed March 24, 2026 in the Southern District of New York Appeals court again blocks Boasberg contempt probe into Alien Enemies Act deportations (Politico, 4/14/2026) On Petition for Writ of Mandamus, In Re: Trump et al, D.C. Cir (April 14, 2026) Unopposed Motion to Vacate Convictions and To Remand For Dismissal With Prejudice filed April 14, 2026  Order in National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States v. National Park Service, et al. filed April 11, 2026 in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Fifth Circuit Strikes Down Federal Law Banning Home Alcohol Distilleries (Reason, 4/11/2026) Decision in McNutt et al. v. United State Department of Justice, Alcohol and Tobacco Trade and Tax Bureau filed April 11, 2026 in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

    48 min

  5. 13 APR

    Peaceful Protestors Are Facing Decades in Prison - Inside the Prairieland Trial

    OA1252 - Just one month ago, nine people were convicted in a Texas federal court for their participation in a protest outside the Prairieland ICE facility in a first-ever prosecution in which the Department of Justice claimed that support for so-called “Antifa” constituted “material support for terrorism.” What can we learn from the plight of the Prairieland defendants about how the Trump administration is punishing dissent, and where do things go from here? We are joined by Ron, a community member who attended the trial, and Prairieland defense attorney Xavier de Janon of the People’s Law Collective and National Lawyers Guild for their unique perspectives on this important case.  “Support the Prairieland Defendants” (DFW Support Committee website) Superseding indictment with material support for terrorism charges (filed 12/10/2025) ‘“Exclusive: FBI Files Counter Government’s Argument in Texas “Antifa” Trial,” Adam Federman, In These Times (3/26/2026) “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence (NPSM-7)”, The White House, September 25, 2025 Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

    1hr 2min

  6. 6 APR

    When You Fall Out of Bed and Land in the Supreme Court

    OA1250 - A fall out of bed during a vacation in Delaware turned into a Supreme Court case, decided this term, that could have big implications for states’ rights to limit tort suits… in federal court. Did Delaware take a good-faith precautionary measure to reduce frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits? Or did they put up an unfair barrier to plaintiffs who deserve restitution? Perhaps reasonable people can disagree on that. But in the rare circumstance you manage to bring that state tort case into a federal courtroom, SCOTUS ruled 9-0 that it’s clear Delaware’s rule is a step too far. (They can still do what they want in their own courts, but not here). How far-reaching will the consequences be? Legal reporting seems split! Come for the (brief, not too gory) medical drama, stay for the review of the Erie Doctrine so you can pass your Federal Civil Procedure class. A nice chill case where the world isn’t burning down and the justices mostly act like normal respectful people. Berk v. Choy, 607 U.S. ___ (2026) Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938) Rules Enabling Act of 1934: 28 U.S.C. § 2071-2077 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Robert Niles-Weed, A Sleeper Supreme Court Case Opens Door to More Frivolous Suits, Bloomberg Law, Mar. 3, 2026. Ronald Mann, Justices Reject State Limits on Malpractice Actions for Cases in Federal Court, SCOTUSblog, Jan. 21, 2026. Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

    58 min

  7. 3 APR

    Trump's Birthright Citizenship Arguments Were Laughed Out of Court

    ... and they really never should have been laughed in to court in the first place. OA1249 - Solicitor General D. John Sauer got plenty of laughs when he brought his best April Fool’s Day game to the Supreme Court this week, and we’re here to break down the  single stupidest case the federal government has ever presented. Matt brings the receipts to show just how badly the Trump administration’s arguments against the plain text of the Constitution and the binding precedent of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) went, and why he is willing to bet his house on the fact that even this SCOTUS will have no choice but to find that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States” means exactly what it says that it means.  “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” The White House (1/20/2026) U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)[PDF] Brief for the Petitioners in Trump v. Barbara Brief for Respondents in Trump v. Barbara Trump v. Barbara Supreme Court oral argument transcript (4/1/2026) Amicus brief filed by Prof. Evan Bernick & Prof. Jed Shugerman Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

    1hr 10min

  8. 27 MAR

    Social Media Is a Defective Product

    OA1247 - Should social media companies be held responsible for the addiction and other harms their features and algorithms have caused to users? A California jury thought so this week, and in this episode recorded within hours of this historic verdict--and the day after another similar win in New Mexico--we examine the legal basis for this suit and what this might mean for thousands of similar legal actions now pending against Meta, TikTok, YouTube, and others around the U.S. Matt also explains why Trump is sending ICE agents to US airports, and how a little-noticed new addition to an existing DHS program has turned some state and local cops into immigrant bounty hunters.  Finally, we go a little deeper than usual in today’s footnote to honor the sacrifice of a federal judge in the Southern District of New York who read more than 6,000 pages of “romantasy” fiction to determine as a matter of law that a book about a part-witch/part-shapeshifter/part-demon who moves from San Diego to Alaska after the death of a parent to meet a hot guy with mysterious powers while discovering her own in urban Anchorage is not “substantially similar to a discerning ordinary reader”  to a book about a half-witch/half-gargoyle who moves from San Diego to Alaska after the death of a parent to meet a hot guy with mysterious powers while discovering her own in a remote Gothic castle. Complaint in K.G.M. v. Meta, filed April 28, 2025 in LA Superior Court Exclusive: ICE’s Bounty Hunters, Ken Klippenstein (March 24, 2026) Leaked spreadsheet of ICE 287(g) payouts [PDF] Complaint in Freeman v. Wolff, filed May 23, 2022 in SDNY Summary judgment order in Freeman v. Wolff, March 16, 2026 (McMahon, J.) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

    44 min
See All (1.2k)

Hosts & Guests

About

Opening Arguments is a law show that helps you make sense of the news! Comedian Thomas Smith brings on legal analysts to help you understand not only current events, but also deeper legal concepts and areas! The typical schedule will be M-W-F with Monday being a deep-dive, Wednesday being Thomas Takes the Bar Exam and patron shoutouts, and Friday being a rapid response to legal issues in the news!

Information

  • Creator
    Opening Arguments Media LLC
  • Years Active
    2016 - 2026
  • Episodes
    1.2k
  • Rating
    Clean
  • Show Website
    Opening Arguments

You Might Also Like