OA208: Moore is Still Less
Added 2018-09-11 03:46:44 +0000 UTCToday's episode takes a deep dive into a 2003 Supreme Court decision, Stogner v. California, and discusses the Constitution's ex post facto clause. Why? Listen and find out!
After that, we break down the $95 million lawsuit filed by Roy Moore against Sacha Baron Cohen alleging defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and fraud. Is it meritorious? Who's Moore's lawyer? Will you laugh? There's only one way to know!
Finally, we end with Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #92 regarding the introduction of testimony against a gang member. Remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!
Recent Appearances
None! If you'd like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.
Show Notes & Links
- Here's the link to Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003).
- Click here to read the $95 million lawsuit filed by Roy Moore against Sacha Baron Cohen.
Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law
Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/
Don't forget the OA Facebook Community!
For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki
And email us at openarguments@gmail.com
Comments
Do you still get to call yourself Judge in legal documents when you were kicked off the bench for violating the constitution?
Guy Chapman, the Solutions Archaeologist
2018-09-11 05:53:17 +0000 UTC
