BROADCASTS.com

Today's episode takes a deep dive into the Bladensburg Cross case currently pending before the Supreme Court with special guest Sarah Henry of the American Humanist Association.\xa0 You'll learn that Andrew is going to speak at the AHA rally on Wednesday, February 27 right before oral arguments!

We bookend the interview with an Andrew Was Right segment about the recent Supreme Court ruling in\xa0Timbs v. Indiana first discussed back in Episode 234.

And on the back end, we briefly discuss Clarence Thomas's bizarre and dangerous concurrence in\xa0McKee v. Cosby.\xa0 Did Justice Thomas really call for the reversal of\xa0New York Times v. Sullivan?\xa0 (Hint:\xa0 yes, yes he did.)

After all that, it's time for the answer to Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #115 about whether you can use facts contained in settlement negotiations.\xa0 As always, remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page\xa0so that you too can play along with #TTTBE!

Appearances
Andrew was just a guest on\xa0Episode 87 of the\xa0So Here's My Story podcast; go check it out!\xa0 And if you'd like to have\xa0either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at\xa0openarguments@gmail.com.

Show Notes & Links

1. Click here to check out the American Humanist Association.
2. We first analyzed\xa0Timbs v. Indiana back in Episode 234.
3. Click here to read Thomas's concurrence in\xa0McKee v. Cosby., and here to brush up on the classic New York Times v. Sullivan.

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, which now has its own Twitter feed!\xa0 @oawiki

And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

\xa0