Legale§e

Episode # 86
Today on Legalese we have the latest installment in my series “Constitutional Myths and Misconceptions.” Today we will be address myths surrounding Article V, which outlines the two methods of amending the Constitution.
We will be addressing the “runaway convention” fallacy. This is the belief that such a convention would be unlimited and uncontrollable in its scope and process.
Fortunately the deep dive into this topic that this episode takes will demonstrate conclusively there is no aspect of that scenario that is supported by our history or our laws.

Show Notes For This Episode – https://constitutionallaw.substack.com/p/show-notes-article-v-myths-and-misconceptions

• Legalese Home Page – https://www.legalesepodcast.com/
• Sign up for Legalese Newsletter! – https://legaleseshow.com/

This video is an edited edition my original podcast episode that was initially published here on April 16, 2024. This is simply a cleaned up version with the profanity and raunchy humor edited out to include as part of a portfolio of my work.

Episode # 83
Today on Legalese we are discussing the the Biden Administration’s new agency rules put into effect by the Department of Labor, meant to be the first step to destroying the ‘gig economy’ on the national level. This reality is one that I have been warning about for the better part of five years, and it finally seems to be coming to fruition.

This move is meant to “regulate” freelance workers and independent contractors, with the government insisting independent contractors are being exploited and must be saved from their own choices.

Really this is nothing more than a move to force millions of people who enjoy the flexibility and freedom of working as an independent contractor to join labor unions as dues paying members.

We will be covering what these new Department of Labor regulations say and do, as well as looking at the various pieces of legislation they are based on to try and understand the real-world effect these regulations will have.

Show Notes Page For This Episode – https://constitutionallaw.substack.com/p/show-notes-freelance-is-dead-long

• Legalese Home Page – https://www.legalesepodcast.com/
• Sign up for Legalese Newsletter! – https://legaleseshow.com/

Episode # 85

Support The Institute For Justice – https://ij.org/support/give-now/devillier

In Devillier v. Texas, the Supreme Court delivers a property rights hat trick. Following the Supreme Court’s rulings in Tyler v. Hennepin County and Sheetz v County Of El Dorado, Devillier v. Texas is now the third landmark takings clause precedent in a row to side with property rights over sovereign immunity and the “compelling government interest” argument.

This is both notable and commendable— Especially considering this takings clause trifecta has consisted of three unanimous opinions, despite the fact that for decades, takings clause cases have traditionally split the Justices along the ideological right/left divide.

On the other hand, this ruling would prove to be much more narrow in its scope than many people had hoped for and expected. The Court declined to address the question presented directly, which asked whether people can seek redress under the self-executing takings clause if the legislature has not provided them with an affirmative cause of action.

The Court also failed to address the initial issue in this case, which was the Catch-22 the state of Texas employed to avoid their obligation to pay just compensation for the taking.

Today on Legalese we will be going through the opinion of the court to break down precisely what the court’s unanimous decision does and does not accomplish. As well as exploring some fascinating tangential aspects of this opinion.

Show Notes Page For This Episode – https://constitutionallaw.substack.com/p/show-notes-devillier-v-texas-wrap

• Legalese Home Page – https://www.legalesepodcast.com/
• Sign up for Legalese Newsletter! – https://legaleseshow.com/

Episode # 84
Today on Legalese, we are discussing the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Sheetz v El Dorado County in which the Supreme Court would find that extortion is unconstitutional.

• Legalese Home Page – https://www.legalesepodcast.com/
• Sign up for Legalese Newsletter! – https://legaleseshow.com/

Episode # 84
Today on Legalese, we are discussing the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Sheetz v El Dorado County in which the Supreme Court would find that extortion is unconstitutional.

• Legalese Home Page – https://www.legalesepodcast.com/
• Sign up for Legalese Newsletter! – https://legaleseshow.com/