SCOTUS Fast-Tracks TikTok Case; Trump Files Nonsense Amicus Brief
Episode description
OA1107 - Chief Justice John Roberts has used his annual end-of-the-year report to remind us that federal judges should not accept luxury vacations from billionaires, fly insurrectionist flags on any of their properties, or ever be criticized for any reason. Or, you know--at least one of those things. We also answer a patron question about what happens if Republicans can't get their House in order by the time that electoral votes are supposed to be certified on January 6th before getting to today's main story: the very real possibility that TikTok may not live to see the first day of the second Trump administration if the Supreme Court allows current law barring it from doing business in the US to take effect on January 19th. How could the US government shutting down one of our nation's favorite new ways to communicate not constitute a massive First Amendment problem? Why did a majority of Congressional Democrats, the Biden administration and pre-election Donald Trump all agree that TikTok is a threat to national security? And when is Matt going to finally release his signature TikTok dance video? We answer two of these questions before dropping a quick footnote to look back on a stupid Congressperson's idea of a smart person's legal argument in support of overturning a democratic election.
-
DC Circuit decision in Tiktok v. Garland (12/6/24)
-
“What If Free Speech Means Banning TikTok?,” Alan Rozhenstein, The Atlantic (12/13/24)
-
ACLU amicus brief in Tiktok v. Garland (12/27/24)
-
Donald Trump’s amicus brief in Tiktok v. Garland (12/30/24)
-
Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (signed into law 4/24/24)
-
“2024 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary,” John Roberts (12/30/24)
Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!
If you’d like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!