OA1176 - Six years after his death in a filthy Manhattan jail cell, Jeffrey Epstein’s disgusting ghost is now haunting Donald Trump--his former “best friend” of more than a decade. What are the “Epstein files” and why has the demand to see them turned MAGA world against itself now?  We go beyond the headlines to explain how one of the most notorious criminals  in recent American history has become this week’s top legal story so long after his death, and why DOJ’s recent efforts to cover for Trump should constitute a ten-alarm scandal. We then review Trump’s attempt to sue the Wall Street Journal for revealing his surprisingly artistic birthday wishes to his “pal,” why his administration is so intent on unsealing grand jury records which DOJ knows can’t be released, how this whole mess has reached the point that the Supreme Court might actually have a good legal reason to reverse Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell’s conviction (!), and why Trump might be about to pardon Maxwell even if it doesn’t. Also discussed: the history of Epstein’s astonishing 2007 non-prosecution agreement and its legacy, the real “Epstein files” that no one has been talking about, and how the President of France might be about to righteously bankrupt MAGA mouthpiece Candace Owens. 

• Complaint in Trump v. Wall Street Journal (filed 7/18/25)

• Undated July 2025 FBI memo summarizing recent Epstein file review 

• Judge Robin Rosenberg’s order denying DOJ motion to unseal Epstein grand jury records in the Southern District of Florida (7/23/25)

• Jeffrey Epstein’s Non-Prosecution Agreement (signed 9/24/2007)

• Ghislaine Maxwell’s petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court (filed 4/10/25)

• Complaint in Macron v. Owens (filed 7/23/25)

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

Professor Heather Varanini has brought us our next question as we study for the Bar Exam!

 If you'd like to play along with T3BE, here's what to do: hop on Bluesky, follow Openargs, find the post that has this episode, and quote it with your answer! Or, go to our Subreddit and look for the appropriate T3BE posting. Or best of all, become a patron at patreon.com/law and play there!

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1175 - How much of a restriction on your First Amendment rights is it to have to upload an ID to access an adult website? That is the question at the heart of Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, the Supreme Court’s recent review of age verification laws such as Texas’s HB 1181. Matt explains how this newly precedential application of intermediate scrutiny to these kinds of restrictions on adult content could have real implications for the future of other kinds of unpopular speech. Then for more context we welcome Zeve Sanderson, the Executive Director of the NYU Center for Social Media & Politics. Zeve and a team of other researchers have recently published the leading findings on the actual effects of age verification on browsing habits, which he takes us through while also explaining some possibly less-restrictive alternatives to current verification methods.

• U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton (6/27/2025)

• Audio of Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton SCOTUS oral arguments (1/15/2025)

• Do Age Verification Bills Change Search Behavior? A Pre-Registered Registered Synthetic Control Multiverse, David Lang Benjamin Listyg† Brennah V. Ross‡ Anna V. Musquera Zeve Sanderson (March 2024)

• Zeve Sanderson’s website

OA1174 - Matt is coming in hot from the front lines of immigration court for an exclusive firsthand account of how a new secret memo directed to ICE's attorneys is trying to unilaterally redefine immigration reality and prime the machine for a new era of mass detention well beyond anything this country has even seen before. In better news: an actual federal judge restores sanity in the surprisingly-difficult-to-locate federal district of central California, and a footnote on why some unexpected federal job openings might be good news for people who hate fascism.

• “ICE declares millions of undocumented immigrants ineligible for bond,” Maria Sachetti and Carol Leonning, The Washington Post (7/15/25) (via MSN)

• Judge Maame Uwusi-Mensah Frimpong’s findings and TRO against ICE in Perdomo v. Noem (7/11/25)

• Board of Immigration Appeals decision in Matter of Q. Li, 29 I&N Dec. 66 (BIA 2025)

• Alito’s majority decision in Jennings v. Rodriguez (2018) 

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

And Professor Heather Varanini has brought us our next question as we study for the Bar Exam!

If you'd like to play along with T3BE, here's what to do: hop on Bluesky, follow Openargs, find the post that has this episode, and quote it with your answer! Or, go to our Subreddit and look for the appropriate T3BE posting. Or best of all, become a patron at patreon.com/law and play there!

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

OA1173 - More people have been to space than practice space law, and Professor Michelle Hanlon is one of its most important modern pioneers. Professor Hanlon joins to talk Star Trek captains, preserving historic sites on the Moon, and why she believes the mass privatization of space is--at least if properly regulated--the only way forward.

• Prof. Michelle Hanlon’s University of Mississippi faculty biography

• “Why Are We All So Obsessed with the Moon?”, Michelle Hanlon, New York Times  (12/7/2024)

• The Artemis Accords (signed 10/30/2020)

• “The Wild Wild West of Space Law,” Michael O’Shea, The Walrus (8/13/2020)

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1172 - It’s been two weeks since the Supreme Court decided that babies in only half of the US get to be born as citizens. We try to make sense of what they left behind in one of the most important shadow docket cases in history, and how concerned Samuel Alito should really be that the actual text of the 14th Amendment might still prevail in the end. Matt also considers how likely it is that Zohran Mamdani might lose his citizenship over his rap lyrics, and we wrap with a quick footnote combining two of our favorite things: bad AI in court and Mike Lindell.

• Trump v. CASA (6/27/25)

• Judge LaPlante’s order certifying class in Barbara v. Trump (7/10/2025)

• DOJ memo re: priorities including denaturalization (6/11/2025)

Professor Heather Varanini is here to get us ready for the Bar Exam with the next question!If you'd like to play along with T3BE, here's what to do: hop on Bluesky, follow Openargs, find the post that has this episode, and quote it with your answer! Or, go to our Subreddit and look for the appropriate T3BE posting. Or best of all, become a patron at patreon.com/law and play there!

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

This content is CAN credentialed, which means you can report instances of harassment, abuse, or other harm on their hotline at (617) 249-4255, or on their website at creatoraccountabilitynetwork.org.

OA1171 - Today's episode is a nice, fun departure from the doom and gloom. Oral arguments in a recent SCOTUS case went terribly wrong. And for once, it wasn't the court itself that was looking like a clown show. The case was AJT v Osseo and it involved disability rights. So naturally, I had to invite everyone's favorite disability rights advocate and all around all-star, Dr. Jenessa Seymour!

Hey folks, I'm taking a little time off! Hope you enjoy this SIO in the meantime. Thank you!

Part 1: The Legal Stuff

Dr. Jenessa Seymour is here to break down something that even our moms are spreading on social media: a group in New York claims to have uncovered discrepancies in the vote count for the 2024 election, and they're suing over it! Dr. Seymour hits ALL of the expert boxes for this one - statistics, voting rights, the law, and New York.

Want part 2 early? Head to Patreon.com/seriouspod!