Opening Arguments

OA1273 - On June 23, 2026, eight people were sentenced in DOJ’s first so-called “Antifa” terrorism prosecution by federal judge Reed O’Connor in the Northern District of Texas to a combined 450 years in federal prison for their participation in a protest held at the Prarieland ICE detention facility on July 4th, 2025. Six of these defendants were charged with what amounted to being present at (or in the vicinity of) the protest, and one who wasn’t even there received 30 years for moving a box of First Amendment-protected publications. In this continuing coverage of one of the most unjust criminal prosecutions of the second Trump administration, Matt goes deep on the government’s case to show just how shoddy the “material support for terrorism” charges really were, and how DOJ used a few text messages, some consumer fireworks shot off on the 4th of July far from any people or property, and $4805.95 in property damage to engineer sentencing enhancements which virtually guaranteed that these protesters would receive harsher punishments than many defendants in the federal system charged with far more serious offenses. What does all of this mean for the future of dissent in the U.S., especially given the national security memo which promised heightened investigation and prosecution of “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, [ ]anti-Christianity… and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality” after the assassination of Charlie Kirk? Then in today’s footnote: An Arizona appeals court takes on one man’s truly contemptible email address.
OA 1252: “Peaceful Protestors Are Facing Decades in Prison - Inside the Prairieland Trial” (OA interview with Defense Committee member and attorney Xavier de Janon)

18 U.S.C. § 2339A (“Material support” statute) 

Full docket in U.S. v. Arnold et al — CourtListener

Meet the Defendants (Prairieland Support Committee website)

First Superseding Indictment

Second Superseding Indictment

Jury Verdict

Benjamin Song — Rule 29 Motion

Maricela Rueda — Rule 29/33 Motion 

Benjamin “Champagne” Song’s statement at sentencing (6/23/2026)

Defense court-documents hub

Commans v. Dunbar, Arizona Court of Appeals #CA-CV 25-0256 (2/6/2026)

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

OA1272 - We are excited to welcome veteran journalist Peter Canellos to discuss his new book Revenge for the Sixties: Sam Alito and the Triumph of the Conservative Legal Movement. In this first-ever biography of Samuel Alito, Canellos draws from extensive interviews and years of research to provide a complete portrait not only of Alito as a person and a jurist, but of the reactionary conservative legal revolution which helped get him to the Supreme Court. In this conversation we go beyond the basics of the book to discuss (among many other things) who Alito really is, how his early life shaped his view of the world, and why so many people who knew him before his nomination now say that they don't recognize who he became after it. 
SAVE THE DATE! Join us  this Sunday June 28th at 4:30 EDT for our first meeting of the OA Book Club--featuring a brief visit from this month’s author Peter Canellos! This new monthly bonus will be available to patrons at every level going forward,, so please subscribe anytime at patreon.com/law!
Revenge for the Sixties: Sam Alito and the Triumph of the Conservative Legal Movement, Peter Canellos (2026)
Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

OA1271 - The single stupidest war of choice the U.S. has ever gotten itself into may finally be coming to an end--or at least the concept of a plan for an end? We go beyond the headlines to see what is actually in this thing, and take on some of the most interesting legal questions raised here. How could this possibly bind Israel, a country which specifically refused to be a party to it? How is the U.S. promising a $300 billion investment which hasn’t been authorized by Congress? And how much power does the President of the United States really have to end Congressional and international sanctions? We then take a quick look at how DHS’s  surveillance state is coming along before going deeper on the recent denial of Judge Hannah Dugan’s final effort to vacate her conviction for allegedly obstructing an ICE arrest in her Wisconsin courtroom before sentencing.
Finally, a quick hoofnote: is it really possible to accidentally purchase 80,000 pounds of live cattle? Matt reveals the truth behind this week’s funniest legal meme.
Full text of U.S./Iran agreement signed June 18, 2026

“Missing children: Mullin describes 'horrific’ migrant child smuggling scheme under Biden admin,”News 3 Las Vegas on YouTube (6/12/2026)

Management Alert - ICE Cannot Monitor All Unaccompanied Migrant Children Released from DHS and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Custody, Department of Homeland Security Office of the Inspector General (8/19/2024)

“Has the US government found 145,000 ‘lost’ migrant children? Fact-checking Kristi Noem,” Politifact via the Minnesota Reformer (3/9/2026)

ICE agent calls legal observer 'domestic terrorist', Ken Klippenstein via Breakthrough News on YouTube (1/24/2026)

'There is no database for protestors,' acting ICE director tells Congress, PBS NewsHour on YouTube (2/10/2026)

Acting ICE director Todd Lyons’ response to a letter from Congressman Maxwell Frost (D-FL), accessed through NPR (4/21/2026)

Mission Creep: AI Surveillance at DHS Crosses Dangerous Line Into Tracking Americans, American Immigration Council (2/6/2026)

Declaration of Nicole Cleland in Tincher v. Noem, Minnesota District Court (1/21/2026)

“ICE has spun a massive surveillance web. We talked to people caught in it,” NPR (3/5/2026)

Decision and Order in United States of America v. Dugan, Eastern District of Wisconsin (6/16/2026)

“Livestock,” CME Group (standard settlement procedures)

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

VR35 - In this episode released on the 54th anniversary of the Watergate break-in, the Vapid Response team raids the archives of the New York Times to retrieve one of the single worst (and worst-timed!) contemporary takes on the scandal which would end Richard Nixon’s Presidency. We then return to a time in which a Watergate-style burglary would be a fun diversion to see how at least one conservative legal writer is defending Trump’s nomination of his former defense attorney to serve as Attorney General.
“Comeback Time,” William Safire,  The New York Times (4/19/1973)

“Todd Blanche is Unfit for Office,” The Editorial Board, The New York Times (6/15/2026)

“Blanche and the New York Times,” Michael Fragoso, National Review (6/15/2026)

Opening Arguments Linktree (Patreon, socials, and more): https://linktr.ee/openingarguments

OA1270 - A good court thingie! A famous case from 1986 gave us the “Batson rule” that prevents the use of “peremptory strikes” to remove people from juries on the basis of race. To this day, racial discrimination in jury selection continues to be a problem. But the Supreme Court recently reinforced the on-going utility of Batson challenges in two decisions… written by Kavanaugh? Tune in to learn about the history and modern application of this important protection of our rights.
Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 (1965)

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986)

J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994)

Flowers v. Mississippi, 588 U.S. 284 (2019)

Pitchford v. Cain, 608 U.S. ___ (2026)

Batson “Justifications”

Catherine M. Grosso & Barbara O’Brien, A Stubborn Legacy: The Overwhelming Importance of Race in Jury Selection in 173 Post-Batson North Carolina Capital Trials, 97 Iowa L. Rev. 1531 (2012).

Shamena Anwar, Patrick Bayer, & Randi Hjalmarsson, The Impact of Jury Race in Criminal Trials, 127 Q.J. Econ. 1017 (2011).

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