OA229: Andrew Miller & the Appointments Clause

Published: Nov. 22, 2018, 5 a.m.

Today's Thanksgiving Special / Rapid Response episode takes a look at the single most important Yodel Mountain case pending right now:\xa0 Andrew Miller's lawsuit before the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.\xa0 Find out what it all means!

We begin, however, with a brief Andrew Was Right and roundup on the status of the Jim Acosta lawsuit, which has been mooted thanks to the injunctive relief won by CNN (and the White House's decision to restore Acosta's credentials).

Then, it's time for the deep dive into Andrew Miller and his Don Quixote-esque foray into our legal system to challenge Robert Mueller's authority.\xa0 Along the way you'll find out who Andrew's Shattered Glass doppelganger is, and learn more than you ever thought possible about the U.S. Constitution's "Appointments Clause."

Finally, we end with an all new Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #102 on evidence and the admissibility of hearsay.\xa0 Find out how Thomas outsources the decision and more.\xa0 And, of course, if you'd like to play along with us, just\xa0retweet our episode on Twitter or share it on Facebook along with your guess and the #TTTBE hashtag.\xa0 We'll release the answer on next Tuesday's episode along with our favorite entry!

Appearances

None!\xa0 If you'd like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

  1. The "recalcitrant witness" statute is 28 U.S.C.\xa0\xa0\xa7 1826.
  2. Click here to read Judge Howell's U.S.D.C. trial court opinion.
  3. We pulled a ton of documents for you in the Miller case, including (a)\xa0Concord's motion to intervene; (b)\xa0Concord's amicus brief on the merits; (c) the eminently silly\xa0Sibley amicus\xa0brief; (d) Robert\xa0Mueller's merits brief; (e) Andrew\xa0Miller's merits brief; (f)\xa0Andrew Miller's supplemental brief; and (g) Rober\xa0Mueller's supplemental brief.\xa0 Phew!
  4. Don't be afraid to check out\xa0In Re Sealed Case, 829 F.2d 50 (D.C. Cir. 1987) for the case that's directly on point.
  5. Finally, you can read the "nearly a heart attack" regs on Mueller's funding (28 CFR \xa7 600.8(a)(2)) here.

Support us on Patreon at: \xa0patreon.com/law

Follow us on Twitter: \xa0@Openargs

Facebook: \xa0https://www.facebook.com/openargs/

Don't forget the OA Facebook Community!

For show-related questions, check out the\xa0Opening Arguments Wiki

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

\xa0