Trump Says DOJ Should Pay Him $230 Million Because Why the F*** Not at This Point

OA1202 - We are pleased to welcome American Immigration Council Senior Fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick for this unique conversation between a practitioner and a policy expert. The AIC is one of the country's leading sources of information and advocacy on US immigration matters, and Aaron watches and comments on these issues like no one else out there right now. Topics include, among many other things, how the Trump administration keeps getting in its own way on immigration issues, how the law of who can be released from ICE custody on bond has been radically reinterpreted within the past few months, and our  hopes for the future in this critical moment for American immigration law.   Aaron Reichlin-Melnick’s bio on the American Immigration Council website Aaron Reichlin-Melnick on Bluesky Donate to support the American Immigration Counsel

OA1201 - This Rapid Response Friday, Matt and Jenessa play a few rounds of “Can They REALLY Do That?”, with topics including: The legal mechanism and filings behind Trump’s $230 million demand for DOJ having the audacity for investigating him for crimes that he did Arizona’s lawsuit against House Speaker Mike Johnson asking a DC federal court to require him to seat incoming Congresswoman Adelita Grijalva after her election DOJ’s first-ever “Antifa” terrorism indictment Finally, in today’s footnote Jenessa reports back from her recent experience sitting for the federal patent bar. Donald Trump’s Form 95 seeking damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act for the FBI’s execution of a search warrant on Mar-a-Lago (filed 8/7/2024) Transcript of former FBI agent Steven D’Antuono’s testimony to the House Judiciary Committee  (6/7/2023) Complaint in Arizona v. U.S. House of Representatives (filed 10/21/2025) Martin v. U.S., 605 U.S. _____ (6/12/2025) Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969) Indictment with additional “Antifa”-related charges against Autumn Hill & Zachary Evetts (10/15/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

VR11 - Today on Vapid Response Wednesday: Thomas, Lydia, and Matt review some of the worst takes to last weekend’s 2700+ “No Kings” events around the U.S. But first, we savor an instant classic of an amuse douche: a recent video of a real-life encounter between a drunk-driving ICE officer and actual law enforcement. We then learn why the National Review is definitely not mad about the No Kings events going so well, and why House Majority Leader Steve Scalise IS mad about the raving socialists of the radical left who have shut down a government full of social programs which Republicans would otherwise absolutely want to fully fund if only they could. Full 30 minute video of ICE officer’s DUI arrest (August 2025) Democrats Look to Rewrite the Narrative with ‘No Kings’ Protests, Brittany Bernstein, National Review (10/20/2025) LEADER STEVE SCALISE: Schumer shutdown hurts families while Democrats rally in DC | Fox News (10/19/2025) “Videos Show ‘No Kings’ Protests Around U.S., World,” CBS News (10/19/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1200 - We've got another great law and science episode for ya! Are polygraphs admissible? Do they work? Matt and Jenessa talk about the history, law, and science of polygraphs, and how criminal courts treat scientific testimony in general. Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1199 - Voting rights expert Jenessa Seymour takes us through this week’s oral arguments in one of the most important cases before the Supreme Court this term: Louisiana v. Callais, which has the potential to end some of the most important protections in the Voting Rights Act and allow states to openly racially gerrymander their electoral districts. Also discussed: a related New York state case which may be affected by Callais, and a footnote on what one lying Chicago cop was willing to do to get out of dozens of traffic and speeding tickets--and how actual justice has finally caught up with him. Louisiana v. Callais Supreme Court docket Oral arguments in Louisiana v Callais(10/15/2025) 52 U.S.C. § 10301 (Sec 2 of the Voting Rights Act) Thornburg v Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986) Rucho v. Common Cause 588 U.S. 684 (2019) Full text of NY’s John L. Lewis Voting Act Submit a comment on the Election Assistance Commission’s proposal to add a proof-of-citizenship requirement to the federal voting registration form “Chicago Cop Who Falsely Blamed an Ex-Girlfriend for Dozens of Traffic Tickets Pleads Guilty but Avoids Prison,”  Jennifer Smith Richards and Jodi S. Cohen, ProPublica (10/2/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

It’s Vapid Response Wednesday, and Thomas, Lydia, and Matt are back to take apart more bad-faith nonsense from some of the worst people in public life. First up: The Atlantic's Caitlyn Flanagan on why it is totally fine that her good friend Bari Weiss is taking over one of the most prestigious news organizations in the United States after running a glorified blog which has been liberated from any reasonable idea of journalistic standards.  MAGA law professor Johnathan Turley then completely fails to explain why capital-A “Antifa”--a set of tactics and ideas which he has previously acknowledged in writing is not actually a “group” and should not be treated as one--is actually a group which should be treated as one. Finally, Newsweek-ruiner Josh Hammer makes his second appearance on Vapid Response Wednesday as he responds to some weird nonsense from Candace Owens. “Don’t Bet Against Bari Weiss,” Caitlin Flanagan, The Atlantic (10/7/25) “They Became Symbols for Gazan Starvation. But All 12 Suffer from Other Health Problems,” Olivia Reingold and Tanya Lukyanova, The Free Press  “Antifa Denial: How a Violent Anti-Free Speech Group Became a Non-Entity in American Politics,” Jonathan Turley, JonathanTurley.org (10/13/2025) “Declaring Antifa A Terrorist Organization Could Achieve Its Anti-Free Speech Agenda,” Jonathan Turley (6/4/2020) “Are Antifa Members Domestic Terrorists? Background on Antifa and Federal Classification of Their Actions,” Congressional Research Service (6/9/2020) “Antiracist Skinheads and the Birth of Anti-Racist Action: An Interview With Mic Crenshaw,” Kelly Hayes, OrganizingMyThoughts.org (4/8/2024) “Josh Hammer Responds Directly to Candace Owens’s Attack on Him,” Youtube (10/10/2025)

OA1198 - In this very special episode, Matt catches up with his Constitutional law professor for the first time in 23 years!  We follow up with our closer look at the science behind Brown v Board (OA1186) with University of Michigan Law professor Michelle Adams, who takes us through the fascinating and ultimately tragic story of how the promise of Brown ended twenty years later in the struggle to overcome de facto segregation in her hometown of Detroit. Professor Adams has literally written the book on this subject, and if you enjoyed this conversation be sure to pick up her recent masterwork The Containment: Detroit, the Supreme Court, and the Battle for Racial Justice in the North.  The Containment: Detroit, the Supreme Court, and the Battle for Racial Justice in the North, Prof. Michelle  Adams (2024) Michelle Adams | University of Michigan Law School Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717 (1974) “Mapping Inequality,” University of Richmond (interactive maps of redlining in major US cities) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1197 - The National Guard is being federalized and sent into cities that the President doesn’t like against the explicit will of state governors and local populations. Matt covers as much as we know from the legal developments around this ongoing national emergency, and Jenessa shares some good news which is already coming out of NY’s recent recently-enhanced equal protection amendment. Finally, in today’s footnote: how do you ticket a car from a moving violation when no one is driving it? NOTE: since the time of this recording, a federal judge has found that the Trump administration’s stated reasons for deploying federal troops in Chicago are “simply unreliable” and blocked the deployment of the National Guard. More next week on this vital story. “Department of Defense Security For the Protection of Homeland Security Functions,” The White House (June 7, 2025)  Affidavit of Portland Police Bureau Assistant Chief of Operations Craig Dobson, filed 9/29/2025 Judge Immergut’s injunction in Trump v. Oregon dated 10/4/2025 9th Circuit’s order staying Judge Breyer’s injunction dated 6/19/2025 Memo from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth dated 9/28/2025 ”For Trump Administration, Fighting Crime Takes a Backseat to Immigration Arrests,” The Marshall Project, Beth Schwarzapfel (10/4/2025) 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!

We welcome CNN anchor Jake Tapper to discuss his latest book Race Against Terror, a nonfiction legal thriller set in the long-ago world of 2011 in which the U.S. Department of Justice is dedicated to vigorously defending national security through strict adherence to due process and the rule of law. Also discussed: the current state of the media, why the world needed a book about Joe Biden’s mental decline which was released within days of Donald Trump being sworn in for his second term, and why Jake is no longer on speaking terms with the surviving members of Lynyrd Skynyrd. Check out Jake’s latest book Race Against Terror, out this week anywhere you buy or listen to books! You can watch this episode on YouTube, too! Race Against Terror: Chasing an Al Qaeda Killer at the Dawn of the Forever War, Jake Tapper (2025) Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again, Jake Tapper (2025) Lynyrd Skynyrd’s Uncivil War, VH1 (2002)(hosted by Jake Tapper) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1196 - This week in our continuing Still Good Law series, Matt and Jenessa take on the 1963 Supreme Court case which is still believed to hold the record for angering the most Americans at the same time: 1963’s Engel v. Vitale. Find out why a decision which even the Warren Court’s conservative justices did not see as particularly controversial to keep New York school administrators from publicly making one 22-word statement to students every morning kicked off a firestorm which is still at the heart of the American culture wars. Engel v. Vitale , 370 U.S. 421 (1963) Engel v. Vitale (New York Supreme Court, 1960) Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947) Massachusetts General Law - Part IV, Title I, Chapter 272, Section 36 (Blasphemy statute) GOD, CIVIC VIRTUE, AND THE AMERICAN WAY: RECONSTRUCTING ENGEL, Corinna Barrett Lain, Stanford Law Review (2015)