OA126: Mick Mulvaney & The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Added 2017-12-01 04:41:21 +0000 UTCToday's episode breaks down the recent kerfuffle over the simultaneous claims of Leandra English and Mick Mulvaney to be Acting Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).
First, we begin with an "Andrew Was Wrong (?)" segment that gives voice to an anti-Net Neutrality argument, a clarification on the Obama administration's antitrust policies, and a factual clarification on the Anheuser-Busch/InBev merger.
After the main segment, Andrew and Thomas answer a fun question about speeding and evidence AND tease the upcoming Law'd Awful Movies #13.
Finally, we end with an all-new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #52 about the constitutionality of a cigarette tax and accompanying program. Remember that you can play along with #TTTBE by retweeting our episode on Twitter or sharing it on Facebook along with your guess. We'll release the answer on next Tuesday's episode along with our favorite entry!
Recent Appearances
None! Have us on your show!
Show Notes & Links
- For Jaqen and others, we recommend OA22: "Libertarianism is Bad and You Should Feel Bad."
- Here is the lawsuit filed by Leandra English; and this is the memorandum supporting her motion for TRO.
- On the other side, you can read the memorandum issued by Asst. Attorney General Steven A. Engel and the companion memo authored by CFPB Counsel Mary McLeod.
- The statutes we cited during the show are two sections of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, 5 U.S.C. § 3345 and 5 U.S.C. § 3347, as well as a portion of Dodd-Frank, 12 U.S.C. § 5491.
Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law
Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/
And email us at openarguments@gmail.com
Comments
I'm actually sad about the lack of Matt Groening content in the intro,
Anonymous ethicist, not a serial killer at all, just asking questions.
2017-12-05 23:04:32 +0000 UTCAgain, the closest analogy would be appointing pacifists to the Department of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and then running the Pentagon into the ground in order to complain that there's too much defense spending.
Opening Arguments
2017-12-03 23:58:51 +0000 UTC
![[18+] The AShark00 Archives](https://xaiju.com/istorage/69905.jpg)
