Share This Episode
Outlaw Lawyer Josh Whitaker & Joe Hamer Logo

Jussie Smollet trial, Dobbs vs Jackson Women's Health organization, and Social Media and the first amendment

Outlaw Lawyer / Josh Whitaker & Joe Hamer
The Truth Network Radio
December 10, 2021 5:00 pm

Jussie Smollet trial, Dobbs vs Jackson Women's Health organization, and Social Media and the first amendment

Outlaw Lawyer / Josh Whitaker & Joe Hamer

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 49 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

December 10, 2021 5:00 pm

The Outlaw Lawyer talks Jussie Smollet trial. Dobbs vs Jackson Women's Health Organization back for more discussion. Social Media and the first amendment make this week's show. Josh and Joe  debate Christmas decorating and Legal Movie Sweet Sixteen tourney bracket reveals the 3rd 4 movie pod.

If you have your own legal question and would like answers you can call Whitaker and Hamer 800-659-1186.

Law, Legal, amendment, censorship, trial,

See for privacy information.


Now nonlawyers welcome into the outline by Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer your hole if you can find them at Whitaker and Hamer law firm to the managing partners practicing attorneys here in North Carolina 46 combined years of marriage between these two and offices in Raleigh Garner Clayton Goldsboro Fuquay Marina and Gastonia. I Morgan Patrick consumer advocate we talk illegal each and every week here on the outliers and we have fun we get very, very serious, but again we were allowed to poke fun at ourselves because that's what we do if you got a legal situation that you're dealing with and you got questions, you can get in touch with Whitaker and Hamer by calling 800-659-1186. That's 800-659-1186.

Just leave your name, number and a brief description of what you're going through an attorney will give you a quick call back and also you can you can send us questions will answer them on future shows what guys, I welcome and I know we got another busy week. Hope you had a great week. We did Morgan provided Joe George have a good week. I did Josh. I really did the grass. You guys really go with a lot of meaty legal topics to get to you, but this week, me, my wife are trying to finalize the Christmas shopping for the for the kids.

You guys have any luck with that is your Christmas shopping on the last-minute guide since it's terrible until I really need to work on it, but yeah, I mean my kids are little bit older. So what you think they want they want cash at these is easy and that's not to come off the shills like you can have any cash isn't held up on a boat in the harbor that is very true.

You know, we I'm usually last-minute God, but that the hysteria I think he got them out to my wife more so than me, so she's she's really been on the up and up and gotten a lot done ahead of time. I think I've only got a few last minute things to do so. Not sure if if you know I haven't been in a lot of stores because we we do a lot of the online shopping so I don't know if the shelves are truly as barren as some people have said, but they are going to be in some trouble with my last minute that the last-minute piece that I've yet to finish. Yet we we do that soon we got a little nervous, and so we did a lot of online shopping and I were just doing some some finishing up but you keep hearing that on the news the other Christmas shoppers and be difficult, but so far so good. I guess no one stuffs really game changer.

I'm like Morgan.

I used to be superduper like that in the morning that stroll out see what I could find in and now the online it's hard and and I've I've taken advantage of online shopping.

I occasionally like to get out. We we were actually shocked. We got a couple of large stores this last this last week and didn't have a big issue. There were lines, but they were manageable. That's my big thing I don't like being in a big store with a ton of people and people are frantic and we didn't experience that this past week so I I was so pleasantly surprised. I'll probably it'll probably be more intense. The closer we get to the day you guys on that same vein, you guys got your decorations are pretty as big decorators. I mean, I'm a medium decorators I guess and say hmmm. The kids I get a lot of peer pressure for my children to complete my decorations and man I tell you what it's it's I'm I'm close to done. I've got a little bit left, but I think I've decided after this is the last year that I'm physically going to do the decorations myself. They got these companies now Joshua that will do these things for you will take him down and actually try to call one. I had a guy I know you posted online. His house was decorated by by this company did a fantastic job. They come they measure, they do it. They take him down to taking down the bad part of me that's what I'm not a big fan off but I called them and unfortunately they are booked up for this year so go ahead and schedule for 2022 sounds sounds pretty fancy. Joseph yeah I think I don't think it's gotta be super fancy, but the amount of time that I spent this weekend on the latter just put icicle lights up there is there is no price not worth paying to avoid that.

Next year I'm traditionalist, you're pretty do the tree, do a little outside but nothing too crazy was driving through Fuquay the clay this past week, and there is a house on Judd Parkway that obviously has watched Christmas vacation way too many times and this I will know what this dudes electric bills going to be because it is me literally it's a heat source. You drive by. There's a heat source right there at the corner. Part of me wants that wants to do that. I just don't have the energy for it. Man, the inflatable's really like drive me insane because we know we try to put the inflatable's up and if you if you got like the timer that you put your lights on you, put everything on the same circuit. The inflatable scene to never come up the same way they go, that they go down and and just drives me nuts me and so we really sweep steered away from a lot of inflatable usage in our Christmas decorations. I'm not so old that I can't remember how fun it was.

As a kid, like when you when you had there's people who did that took so much time with her house and unity drop by. That was like the matter.

Lights back in the day right you have any light displays that you paid you bought a ticket you drive through you. You found the people who really went over and beyond on their houses and you drove by there house is sought. 1015 seconds however long your parents feel comfortable slowing down in traffic to see it now when I see that stuff I'm like MS bad for traffic.

I don't have that same joy that but but it's good people do that I don't work were pretty medium on the space. Whatever my wife feels like it when I don't get too heavily involved in the Christmas decorating so like you I thought you could really knock it out of the park. If you put your heart and soul into it and so so busy all the time so much that you think it's tough man and then you do when you do spend that time minutes.

It's guy gets it's rewarding the kids. The kids enjoy it. I enjoy it to.

After I'm done, but it's just getting their man is just getting there, so the earlier you can get there the better. But you know where it was the eighth so not that far from Christmas and were still not fully done so were and have a not many days to enjoy it and that is sad but that company man.

I'll report back this time next year 2022. Check back with me and I will give you my results of hiring whatever company it is the come and decorate my house for me. Are you guys are you guys car decoration guys or you leave your cars alone.

II lewdly not that I don't think I don't I would even know where to start to do is to just check the reindeer you put the reindeer horns in the nose on it. I think that's what most folks do. They got car inflatable's now to that you can put I saw those the other day. You can put them in like a front seat, plug it into the veal cigarette lighter and and you can have a passenger, that's an inflatable so that's a step too far.

Morgan okay I just wanted to ask. Obviously a very sensitive topic but drawing the line what the other the other holiday.

Thought I had listed on the start of the show is, you know, we were all in North Carolina. We like to talk about the ACC in and state accepted at bits of what is the holiday bowl out in California and I'm sad to report even though I saw every home game this year. I am not going to make the trip to California for the holiday bowl so I understand, like you Josh that they had such a great year.

It's almost a shame that a larger percentage of the fan base are not to be able to go in person. I mean there will be a lot to go but that is a that's a track folks to be ever done cross country that is some else. Forgive me Josh, what day is that bowl on things. The 2028 thing is probably only there's any other ballgame. I think what I read I read a state guy was trying to make it sound like it was the best bowl ever that we could've gone so you but I think it's 28 things in prime time ESPN and doesn't really have meaning competing against I'm sure to be funny. I'm sure that'll be a good time and whoever does make that trip at sound like he doesn't like a good one, but I think watching from the comfort of your home and the warmth without that long trip. I think you'll be just fine. Was it was Caroline went to the way the mayonnaise one is that what happened I did see Wayne or JR you can you're being serious. Yeah, it's the Duke Mayo navies and their taken on South Carolina defined mayonnaise EMG job that they are playing in silence. What to do that at Adam not being facetious. I didn't pay attention does Duke have the six wins are they going to want gathering a duty to be this you there in the toilet bowl know they don't have six wins. Josh, you know Isaac swings Josh, I really wasn't digging there I decided that you are he didn't have it that it's great season but is it as it is a big fan the kids they put the heart into it.

I know they they really gave it their all. They did but I think they got outscored like hundred and 95 to 20 over the last like eight games of the season, or somebody was. It was, not a very great into the season. Of course, do will have a new football coach next year, but be very interested to see how how that plays out and were optimistic as to transfer the future. Thank you David Kukla for all you did for us absolutely. I think you do need to send out a big thank you think you did wonders for the program and now next up sorta be talking about Jesse small at the case, very bizarre case that was heavily in the news a few years back and then kinda died down. But now that he is on trial date. The closing arguments have have come and gone over to BC and the verdict they are working to discuss that case get into the facts out it very interesting and strange case to say the least, the outlaw liars Josh Whitaker and SchellHamer at Whitaker and Hamer law firm.

The managing partners there again practicing attorneys here in North Carolina offices in Raleigh Garner Clayton Goldsboro Fuquay Marina and Gastonia again. 46 combined years experience between these two. If you got a legal question call this number 800-659-1186, 800-659-1186 may be going through something you sent questions. They're here for you.

800-659-1186. You can also send your questions to the show and will use them in an upcoming episode questions at the outlaw line or not, please check out our website.

The outlaw back after this Dona. They are practicing attorneys here in North Carolina I morgan Patrick consumer advocate and I often say the referee between these two. We have some serious legal conversations.

We also have a lot of fun here on the program if you got a legal situation you're dealing with and you got a question you can always contact the firm 800-659-1186. That's 800-659-1186 leave your name and contact information briefly what it's about an attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will be in touch with you guys. I know we got a lot to get into take away baseboard were to be talking about Jesse small it again very interesting case.

Very bizarre fact pattern. I think it was about three years ago. Now that this actually first came to light.

The incident itself for for people who are not familiar with Jesse small at he is an actor that was known for the show Empire very popular show.

Of course he was ultimately not asked to come back to that show.

After the fallout from this event. But he was also a child actor who starred in the fantastic fantastic film. The Mighty Ducks was Josh. You told me you've never seen the Mighty Ducks yet.

We were just talking about this and I'm diamond. I've never seen.

I'm aware of what Empire is a never watched it and then again I watch the same things over and over again. I have always meant to watch the Mighty Ducks but I was little old when the Mighty Ducks came through a little older like I have seen the sandlot which I think is is probably the same thing was very different films. Josh varied the sandlot does not have Emilio, Esther, do you even know who Emilio Estevez is since you're not my night out because I have seen young guns. I think I throw out breakfast club for the youngest but anyway this out aloud so getting back to the facts of the Esme, let case I this is an incident took place nearly 3 years ago. The original story when it came out. They basically what was what was presented by some outlet as is what took place. He was walking late night very late night in Chicago walking to Subway, I believe, and he claimed he was approached by two masked men that basically assaulted him. He said he was punched in the face. He said they poured an unknown chemical substance on them, which I think he said he suspected was bleach. He had a rope that was wrapped in tight around his neck. He said that they scream racial slurs. Adam and he also said that they were, which is this is again very very bizarre fact pattern but basically said that the attackers as they were attacking him kept making mention to Magdala the Donald Trump slogan who was the then president at the time they kept making constant reference to make America great again which again extremely extremely strange fact pattern but but that's how it was reported and again at the time. This is reported and of course a lot of celebrities, a lot of media everyone as they they would be if this was a true and factual account of what happened extremely concerned there's a lot of a lot of support for for the actor. A lot of people you commenting on the state of race relations in America. Based on this incident it just it really stirred up a lot of fuss and I think I remember that being a big it was just basically a sounding board for anybody to obviously, if true, horrible anyone would would would argue that it wasn't a horrible occurrence of it. If it is true but but certainly everybody from really famous people to really low level D level celebrities just use it as a jumping off point to look at the of the state of race relations in the USA and a lot of people commented a lot of people very fired up and in again as they should be used. Who would suspect you know, until you really dig into the facts of this you know you don't have any reason to believe that anybody would would perpetrate what is essentially since by that by the authorities at least been called a hoax. In this manner, it just doesn't compute that someone, especially someone very famous in the public eye would would do this. What's been alleged so but shortly after the original facts are reported, you know there's a lot of lot of outrage, a lot of media coverage and then very shortly thereafter. You start seeing some some very suspicious things that start coming out.

You know it's reported that some outlets not cooperating with authorities. He's not really talking to him. He refused to turn his phone over to the police which they needed it because you know, according to him he was on the phone with his manager and there were some you know that the altercation was heard in and there was phone records that were at issue.

So eventually, after some investigation the police apprehend to what they call people of interest in the case. They don't say there suspect they just say that there there people of interest and they are the us in Dario Austin Darlow brothers that the brothers is what will call them two men from Nigeria that had previously worked as extras on the show Empire which Millet was Millett was working on at the time in. They also said that they had a relationship with and they had worked out with them. Basically that they they knew Millett on that same day's Millett gives an interview the same that these gentlemen are apprehended is an interview and and basically in not so many words suggest that the attackers were were white men again really stoking that it divisive racial hate crime aspect of of this so of evidence eventually comes out that says that Millett's Millett was in close contact with the brothers that he instructed them on the materials to buy for the attack.

Basically, he orchestrated the attack as you know, a publicity stunt or a hoax or some some way to whatever his his motive was yeah was he basically faked the entire thing.

I don't understand the motivation there like I don't get the bladder. I do so I don't get like us you know if he did fake it. That's terrible. You know but I know I don't see the plus side of thinking something like that. I guess I had been able to figure that out. Why think if you look coming.

He got a lot of attention. He got a lot of attention. He got a huge outpouring of support and people really know telling him how brave he was and he himself like if you look at the media around the time you know he he presented himself as you know this really strong figure standing up for for gay-rights for minority rights. He called himself the gay Tupac. I think that was his quote in one of the interviews and he really like you know he really absorbed the spotlight here and kind of guts and I think I twisted it into a lot of media coverage and a lot of publicity so I can see that being the motivation but at the same time it's your right man it's it's it's it's it's there so many ways to go about getting attention other than this, assuming that these allegations were true.

I'm so eventually there's felony criminal charges that are brought against him for disorderly conduct and filing a false police report. No charges are actually dropped to their dropped and it's not until almost a year later that there's a special prosecutor that is appointed and he's ultimately charged with six total counts of lying to police, which is the charges that he is most recently been on trial for I saw closing arguments were set for today so this one old this one that we may get a verdict before you know we get air but it was the big thing here was. He took the stand rights of the prosecution put on their case and, like you know we talk a lot about Rittenhouse here, the defendant took the stand and I read some of the line of questioning yesterday just as it was being reported and really some snippy testee exchanges between your own cross-examination. So he is taken the stand and and what I could really tell from what I read is a course he saying this is a rule is incident. It really happened, but hers is kind some odd testimony yesterday what I could tell minutes in case all around, you know there there so many odd things. There's you know there's footage that has come out this body cam footage that is come out of's Millett talking to the officers on the night of the incident and he still got the rope around his neck and in this is alleged to have taken this footage is from seven hours after the incident took place in in the officers actually questioned him like you want to take that off like you want to take that off like what what is that still on your neck, for he said basically said he just wanted them to see it and there's just a lot of really strange things you know the these it's clear that's Millett had a absolutely had a relationship with the two individuals in question and they've all obviously come out and said this was all perpetrated. He instructed them what to do. There is numerous phone calls in and around the time of the incident and there is there's a lot of evidence that points to that being the case, and of course Millett's counterargument to that is he saying that the brothers basically were trying to fake an attack on him, but not bacon attack but actually perpetrator real attack but but hide their identity. I guess to force him to pay them to be his security.

I think that's what his argument is strange all-around man. He's a charismatic guy.

You know he's he's an actor. He's a famous actor up for a reason. And you know a lot of that charisma and ability to speak well has has been displayed in court but all around just the super bizarre incident and it really comes down to it's it's a it's an issue of credibility and and how you assess his credibility versus the credibility of the prosecutors, the police who investigated and that the two brothers that are at the center of this case is is really what it boils down to how I seem to me, and yet I've never dealt real deeply and it is our I remember coming up and I kind of looked at been taken notice of the trial seem to me this would be one of those things are just better.

You know you know yet if the evidence the menu no you don't expect to find anybody at using like this kind of thing that should just be left alone and I don't know that the just seeing what seems seems he is a sign to say that and I see that I see your point there but at the same time in this if you go back and you look at the firestorm that this really created you're talking about a lot of of police resources that were dedicated to this investigation a lot energy spent it in the in the media again. The a lot of folks up in arms.

And if you look at it if you take the prosecution's argument is true and this was really just a truly completely orchestrated hoax, for whatever reason, I think that's something that everybody should want to see you know punished in some way to discourage anyone from from doing that going forward, but which I like you said, it's tough.

There's not a lot of tangible concrete evidence that I've seen. There is a lot of heat. He said she said in it and you can look in and draw inferences from you all the circumstantial evidence in you. We can say this is really none of it really makes sense, but yeah with you to be very interesting to see how I don't know that I want to make a prediction on how this goes what he's he's given a lot of testimonies is the interesting thing to me sees him a lot of testimony. They really made him answer some tough questions which is what happens when you take the stand as a as a defendant yet crossed but I you know a judge you know if he's found if it's found that this is a hoax right if that's what the jury comes back and finds you as a defendant. Yet the worry about perjury right a mural to stay in your answering questions are obviously having the you know to to go on record not just being charged by your being asked.

Things are on record in if they're not true. I you know judge can you know that the court perjury charges. You know you don't want to perjure yourself on the stand, but I'll be interested to see if that yes if he is found to be guilty, do we have any kind of perjury issues. I got a lot of issues if he spent the kill teaching. I think I think he's gonna have an and you've already seen at a drastic impact on his career on the opportunities available to them. So he's there's definitely been reap repercussions for this, as it already stands but you note gonna be interesting to see that the legal ramifications of what kind of penalties that he faces it in the event that he is found guilty here and we don't know what's gonna happen, but I can almost, almost guarantee his careers over. He's not doing anything else.

I think it's done. I think it's I think you look this is one of those situations where even if there's not concrete, tangible evidence. There's enough there were a reasonable person can connect the dots and and yet he's gonna have trouble going forward. Okay guys yellow lawyers Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer again. The discussions are legal. Each and every week what's coming up in our next segment. I think the next segment Morgan a look at that Dobbs be Jackson women's health case before the Supreme Court. Their oral argument since our last show setting really going about permanent night sounds good. The outliers Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer your halls managing partners at Whitaker Hamer law firm 46 combined years experience between these two and again offices in Raleigh Garner Clayton Goldsboro Fuquay Marina and Gastonia and just remember folks, if you got a legal question of your own.

Give the firm a call.

Leave your name, contact information little bit about what your question is and they will be back in touch. Here's the number 806 five 911 $0.86 800-659-1186 if you like your question a brooch on the program will just email it to us questions and theology and will use that in a future program keep your name out of it but will answer the question on the air.

Check out the website again. It's the outlaw law, back right after this. They have offices in Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay Marina and Gastonia. Just a reminder they are practicing attorneys here in North Carolina. We talk about legal topics all across the country and across the world, but they are practicing attorneys here in North Carolina. If you got a legal question of your own and you need some answers. The number to call is 800-659-1186. That's 800-659-1186 leave your contact information. Briefly, what call is about an attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will be back in touch with you.

You can also email the show your question. Ask questions at the outlaw law, you guys I know that we thought we had big cases. Great discussions on where we going next. Well you Morgan. I want to spend more time we talked about this site at least on two occasions, but Dobbs be Jackson's women's health organization. This is the Mississippi abortion case that was before the Supreme Court, I will. Last week was oral arguments that I think last time we talked for the show. Oral arguments were actually going on. As we were. As we were recording and so since then of course we I was able to listen to the oral arguments in Tennessee were everybody was going Joe. I think we got 100% accuracy on our judgment prediction rate right now and I think we predicted that we wouldn't see whether prediction that Roe V Wade would not be overturned is that our is our official stance here on out, a lawyer, I think our official position and I would remain vague so we can continue to hold that 100% rating but I think we basically said there was knocking to be any kind of landmark change that it wasn't gonna be some drastic wide sweeping change to anything and essentially Roe V Wade would ultimately unit with with minor if any changes be uphill well and okay okay let's that's that's been right now for how far we went to the oral argument certainly kind of exposing others when we talk about Supreme Court even though there there's political undertones. I really won't talk about Supreme Court justice. I think the injustices while they have their political leanings may be a Republican president or Democratic president appointed them.

I think once they get to the Supreme Court and they consider cases again. While they have political leanings. I don't think their decisions are political and I give them all the benefit of the doubt that that it's not political, so I'm in a say. The court is probably right now I think most major outlets that follow. The Supreme Court would see them as a having a conservative majority is not a political conservative, that's just kind of you know term you use. You know more doing so in a conservative majority, and that was certainly on display. Gentlemen, if you had a chance to to see a whole lot or listen to a lot of the oral arguments, yet you not at night and followed as closely as as you did Josh have been relying on you to to keep me updated. You did a fantastic job on that was the yeah I think what you think your assessment of the court is fair and like you said it's not it's not really conservative in the political sense, despite you know that the political leanings of who appointed these justices but but like you said it's it's a different distinction when you when you refer to a justice in this in the sense of being conservative and it's really conservative in their interpretation of the Constitution.

In essence, were quick reviews this Mississippi case comes up because Mississippi state legislature Bible state lawmaking body made a law that after 15 weeks can get an abortion, so they put a limit on when a woman can choose to seek an abortion and an understanding of all the Roe versus Wade and all the cases that have come after that, can you point out where were at with abortion law that violates so that they're basically Mississippi is that a we know more about when a fetus is viable now and then, when a fetus can feel pain, and when a fetus should be considered its own individual and were going to say after 15 weeks you can't do it and they knew this would be an issue. This is something that would get litigated because it's in contradiction to the established law and so this is, but now it's before the court. We got some new justice he have justice like Clarence Thomas. He was going on record. He disagrees with Roe V Wade, and I think we spent a whole show just talking about you know explicit right center in the Constitution the right to bear arms right to freedom of speech things that are written expressly into the Constitution. And then we got all these rights that we get because the court over time has created this right to privacy. They have they have read the Constitution in a way as to imply some protections that may be the founding fathers probably didn't have a lot of there was a probably a lot of dispute on no abortion back when the founding fathers originally wrote the Constitution. And so the court has gone out of its way to, imply some rights that we arguably today find important privacy abortion things like that so won't rehash that here, but client Clarence Thomas is on record saying Roe V Wade he thinks is bad law is an applied right is a lot you can Google and read that he's done and you have a justice like Stoudemire.

I had a lot of had a lot to say and she obviously believes that the court did not make state review Wade is president and kind of polar opposites, and all the other justices are coming trying to find their way but there were some interesting things here.

Joe and so some of the I think having on an barrier, new justices, they, separated they look back at the Ruby Wade argument and coming out body autonomy right. It's a part of this abortion debate, your woman should be able to choose her body, it's her choice of his body autonomy argument and missed the burden of parenting argument is that Scott what they read this abortion debate to be about and so is interesting to hear them ask questions because Baird made the comparison on the body autonomy issue is Supreme Court is not invalidated any vaccine mandates they have badmouthing Dave heard I could be wrong. I misremember sometimes show, but I don't think they've heard any cases. They've been denied. I think hearing anything so any kind of vaccine mandate cases made its way up there.

I think the Supreme Court is just declined to hear yeah and you know I think it's important Josh going back to what you're talking about the fact that you know you got certain explicitly stated rights in the Constitution and then you got the these implied rights that we discussed as well and you note is important.

Note the fact that the right is simply implied doesn't necessarily make it any less valuable than those that are stated explicitly and in the way that the Constitution is drafted that you know there's these implied rights. That's just that's just kind of the way you know they're there. And that again it doesn't reduce the importance of some of those but it that right to abortion.

It absolutely doesn't explicitly appear in the Constitution and you know I think the media has kind of interpreted a lot of questions that are being asked by these conservative quote unquote conservative judges as potentially you know design in a way where they could conclude they might shift and change this. Roe V Wade argument of this review. Wade ruling and an essentially overturned about a stick by that that initial decision.

We may Josh were knocking to see any kind of a major major shift there.

I even you listen or when you follow the Supreme Court any follow oral arguments. You never know if a justices is playing devils advocate just wants to know what the lawyers in front of them are going to say or Halligan or sponsor you. You never really a judge.

Justice usually is and show their cards but I mean, follow their line of questioning and it does seem.

I was actually will bit surprise, it does seem after the questions they ask. And that's like you said that's what the media seized on that at least some of these more conservative justices are at least entertaining the idea that maybe Ruby Wade is is bad law, but you know Baird mirrors Barrett's line of questioning about you know we've if parenting is the issue you got safe haven laws you got adoption adoptions are easier than they were back in the back of my days as you say maybe just if parenting is the problem we we got ways around. And so for looking at body autonomy said it was interesting. I just haven't I haven't seen a justice focus on that before and especially can, contradicting it to how the Supreme Court is like that basically someone who has authority mandate you get the vaccine. You get the vaccine and the Supreme Court cited intervenor at least has that was all that was interesting, but it does seem like now I'm in a stay with the fact that I don't think were in the sea. The court overturned Roe V Wade, I do think they may uphold this 15 week. That's what I was, yet I might be a middle ground you know they Roe V Wade, Bill, though keep in place. This 15 week limitation. They might be entertaining that same place. I don't know how that affects our percentage of that but I is affected at all because I think like you said, clean note clarifying clarifying the Roe V Wade ruling adding adding, you know, I guess quote unquote reasonable restrictions to the right to to get an abortion. I don't think that's an overturning of Roe V Wade, I think you know an overturning of Roe V Wade would would almost be an outright prohibition in and I don't think working obviously on the grid to see that here so I think are. I think we will stay perfect in our record well have to wait and see. In the see how it all turns out the larger Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer Whitaker and Hamer law from the managing partners Derek and practicing attorneys here in North Carolina folks, if you've got a question a legal situation that you are in and you need some answers give them a call 800-659-1186.

That's 800-659-1186 leave your name and contact information briefly what it's about and an attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will be back in touch with you shortly. Questions at the outlaw lawyers where you can send a question to the program will use it on the future show possibly and even go to the website. The outlaw guys what's coming up in our next segment Morgan coming up next were to talk about a recent Texas law, which judge actually issued a very scathing opinion on and striking it down dealing with social media networks and those social media networks dictating what content can and can't be disseminated online on the flat all right. We'll talk in social media. Coming back right after you hear this date and they have offices all over the place. Raleigh Garner, Clayton Goldsborough, Fuquay Marina and Gastonia almost need oxygen just to get through the list I Morgan Patrick consumer advocate we talk legal each and every week, and the topics are very very serious.

We also like to have fun on the program if you got a question a legal situation you are in a you can always call the firm 800-659-1186. That's 800-659-1186 or email. The question will handle here on the show.

You do that by going to send it to us. Check out the website, the go talk some social media now can hardly wait for this one because were all about her social media.

We are Morgan social media censorship very prominent topic lately and it's really funny, you know, we talk about the bias we see in a lot of news networks and and really from from both sides of the aisle, and if you pay attention to the people complaining about social media. It's funny because you've got you got one side of the argument that argues you know they're there.

What they their viewpoints are being suppressed.

Things are being taken down. They're not allowed to to speak freely on social media networks and then you can have the other side of the coin, making the counterargument that you know what they are saying is being promoted too heavily and it's just like who's it's insane to look at to opposite sides of the argument basically argument so staunchly against against the same thing and and well Hannibal's perception can be so different like that. Yeah, that the were thing when you start reading about this there both First Amendment arguments of both sides are making much the same argument both First Amendment arguments, and not to have to measuring a couple articles about this had to stop. Think about it for a minute and get back into the article they have the hate each other so much in the and it's almost like they're making the same argument but you get you get that tribalism you get on you know people are so committed to their team winning and so stuck in their own viewpoints that that she just hit you get these crazy insane arguments where there what are they even argue about, but that's kind of the backdrop against which which were to talk about this new Texas law. So without getting into the guts of this Texas law to deeply and really dissecting dissecting it. It basically stated that it was trying to compel social media platforms to not remove certain things from those platforms, so it was, it was essentially adding argument for it from the proponents of it was that it was in the interest of the First Amendment freedom of speech, type of argument that these these networks should not be able to remove certain content in certain things that were were being posted on them and interestingly enough that the judge who overturned this law he comes back in and uses the First Amendment as the very basis for which gives these social media platforms.

The right to restrict content any way that they see fit. Before it's referring to is Joe.

Just as a Texas state law.

We talked about Texas state altar three times I hear recently how easy is it to get a law passed in Texas. Apparently it doesn't take much it.

It doesn't take too much at all. I would say Hannah and and then you see them get just smack down to the ground so forcefully that he had ice. So yes, it basically what the judges come out and said, in this case is essentially said that not allowing social media platforms to curate their own content is a violation of those companies First Amendment rights so you know you don't often think of the First Amendment right you don't think of it in terms of what you are allowed to remove from your platform or not promoting your platform and that's basically what the judge is saying here that that right to free speech. It gives you the right to omit content as well and you can curate content on your platform. Basically any way that you see fit. And so if that if that includes you not disseminate disseminating what you consider to be objectionable content, then you can do that because you have that right and that is permitted and that the company's editorial discretion.

You get to get to private actors here right to the Texas state law think their goal here was the maybe protect you and me and you likely want for something up on Facebook that they might violate their standards that Facebook can take down her favor one side over the other, or my vaccine study of rear vaccine studies. I think there were some things I slowest trying to. Maybe I am really read anything verbatim in the that said they were doing this but I think their thought was Marina protects First American you have First Amendment rights of people who are using the social platforms and an end and a first name is not really accurate because of course this is in us Facebook and twitter nonstate actors right. We talked about the First Amendment. It is not the government, you know tell you what you can save the course Facebook, Twitter, private companies, media Morgan posting on Facebook where private citizens does not really.

We say First Amendment Catherine at around lightly, but the judge wasn't because here social media platforms have a First Amendment right to moderate content on their platforms as they see fit.

Just it was just it was just interesting thing is the best way to put business was US district federal courts of the state law got challenged in federal court is US District Court and he struck it out and who knows if Texas will take it any further than that. Yeah, and you know it's like you said when you get where where that First Amendment comes into play is when you have the state attempting to pass a law restricting the that this company's ability to express, which in essence is there expression is not allowing people to express themselves if that if that makes sense. So it's kind of a strange argument but you see I'm not personally a a big posting on Facebook person. I think I may have had one post in years total. I do Peru's I do browse I think you post to give it more than I do. Joshua but you with something you see from a lot of people, especially people who are very politically. I really want to put their political opinions out on Facebook which is a large percentage of the population. I feel like that, that uses the platform, but it's amazing how many people you see that or you and I'm back from my 10 day band and a bit if you have been banned from Facebook twitter any any other social media outlet. Josh know you I think I did. I got real confusing. One time I came around posted but if you if you're a Facebook friend of mine usually is a picture of the kid or some song I remember I got not really political data to start off with but I did get like I got one as all things that appeared on my posts you know that I can't remember what it was like almost 1 is vaccine things I gel or anything, but it was it was really innocent post. I remember that now I guess it's just algorithm and some call it side but jail is also the only thing that happened recently for me was there we went to a Duke basketball game and I posted the Cameron crazies just can't get that atmosphere because it's been so long since we seen the kids and they're going nuts and that apparently the video was too long and they could make this they could make the song out so there was copyright infringement and so they muted. They muted the video and blocked it because I was not paying an oil excess and you have to you have to put like a disclaimer that you don't own the rights and even then they can still come back.

Yeah, they can still take that from you but you and everything I was going throw into guys to social media. Everybody's know got their opinion on it but one of the things one the reasons I got on social media in a number of years ago was for high school reunion right and then everybody and their mother that I went to high school with descended upon my head in the next two weeks that was crazy, but the other thing I noticed two. It's a great way to keep up with people as you said Joe, just checking in. As you can see how the families are growing I were so far apart now were spread out all over the country but you can see how the cousins and the aunts and the uncles and some your best friends of your college buddies, their families and how they are, growing up and you don't have to see them physically, but there there on social media. You can do that, or you can change the world by sharing about your political opinion Morgan I got old tiny question for you what it's about back before MySpace. What was that yearbook was a college. That's what that was the first one that connected people. Yeah, I guess I guess so.

And there's there's been common offshoot with with Facebook because it's got its own page. But yeah there's. There was the yearbook, but I I was not on Facebook and there like a young jump on Facebook and so when I did that I probably graduated with around say 375 seniors from Watauga high school in Boone, North Carolina, and I bet you 200 of them got in touch with me in two weeks. That's amazing. I remember the first time I figured out what is I think you had to pay for your boogers like a free part of it, but you can sign up and it was by classificatory bays are also happier later but as a writer, but he still around and he could really communicate with people. Amanda seems like that was like a long time ago man hot dogs cost a nickel type of story that's it's good stuff, will guys we go take a short break, we've got really important stuff to get to on the other side you're listening to the outlaw law are Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer Whitaker and Hamer law firm managing partners Derek and practicing attorneys here in the great state of North Carolina 46 combined years experience we talk legal topics each and every weekend I referee between these two.

They do a fantastic job breaking it all down. We also have a lot of fun along the way but it can can get serious, but we do like to go sprinkle in the fund. So that's coming up next. If you got your own legal question is been burning and you need an answer you can call the firm 800-659-1186 that 800-659-1186. You can also email the program will use it and of course keep your name out of the boy is the question upcoming episode. Check out the website, the and we've got movie tournament. The bracket we got another plaid to announce for legal movies got a sweet 16. We've revealed half the bracket we will get to another four teams of four movies coming up on the other side of her back right after this back Josh Whitaker, Joe Hamer, your host liquor Hamer law firms where you can find them during the week. The management partners their part in North Carolina offices in Raleigh, Garner, Clayton. Those were a few quivering and gas only a combined years experience talked about some very serious legal topics, different cases that are out there now we get to the really really hard-core stuff Josh were were into our bracket for legal movies catches up you I did mean to put this on social media and any Omega get around to it this way but so we had 16 team best legal movie all-time tournament we got a couple of brackets we've already talked about the black-and-white pot was to kill a Mockingbird. 12 angry men miracle on 34th St. inherit the wind still having watched an error when I get on that the next bracket we revealed was my cousin Vinny was calmly bracket so that my cousin video legally blonde liar liar jury duty. I looked up big daddy always had big daddy watch big daddy and I would count, we could always redact jury duty as essay Pauly shore doesn't need to be in the tournament that that may be we may amend it and pretend like there was a play and that no one knew about jury duty got bumped yet they did watching the heroes what is on the cove in the covert protocol that I was watching the getting the kids thing that when a million times.

We're why Sumer watched it in the last part of his eye court case is like me that would've been perfect but this week we we we got two pods laughed and in major talked about this. We can change this week we had. This is kind of action bracket, but a lot of action legal movies.

When you get by and not a lot action in the courtroom.

My brother, so we we change us to action/thriller, and will probably lose action after this after this broadcast is called the thriller bracket, but so. Yet, the number one seed I coming up the set up is as seeds. Here's the number one seed Ms. bracket. I've got a movie which I have seen and in enjoyed time, but the devils advocate is that calories. That's Kiana Reeves it's Al Pacino and I went out again once. I don't know if it's my number 1C Josh but II can see it. I can it's got some heavy hitters.

It was very popular at the time so will I will received and he was wearing was easy.

Yet, I think all of these movies were were pretty well received that I probably haven't seen the devils advocate since it came out somehow that holds up you never hear about it anymore. Several TVs maybe doesn't hold up. They held up well man. Kiana Reeves is ageless and he looks the exact same today as he looked in that movie. So if it's a movie star Kiana Reeves for the very most parts can hold up sorry this is next one. I gotta be honest never saw this one but but it seemed pretty popular.

Everything that I looked at so primal fear is that some familiars adamantly.

It is a movie Josh in Italy and it is a a very popular movie doesn't surprise me. You haven't seen it, Richard Gere. Of course, but but yet very very solid movie Edward Norton makes his film debut as an altar boy in this movie and Edward Norton, a very very good actor. So there's this the movie that that gave the world Edward Norton is next movie this another old-time story is next.

Maybe I was at Best Buy and I was at a Best Buy is in a Blockbuster video and for those of you don't know you back. I needed a Blockbuster that have the tapes and watched a certain amount of times a permanent manager bomber like a buck.

These are VHS tapes and this wasn't a DVD or anything like this.

What I bought.

I think this one up as a dollar by saying you know what I might watch this thing a watch like 15 minutes of it, but I put it here on the list because it came up a lot message that he mimics which stronghold must've been so wrong man so strong this Mississippi burning so that that made our list tears as, there is like a lot of action scenes in it. Jean Hackman Watson and Sandman. I got turned off and watched Hoosiers is probably what is Jean Hackman's America, so I watching Hoosiers would be a lot more fun the lighter yeah and into our last our last pagan and I think this could be number one. Josh, you haven't seen it, but you should watch it a highly recommended time to kill classic Matthew McConnaughhay you've got.

You've got you got Samuel L. Jackson, who plays a great role in the film you got Kiefer Sutherland who is a terrible racist doesn't create fantastic and terrible racist but haven't seen that women yet Sandra Bullock, a veritable Who's Who of people in this movie Josh will guys I know we gotta wrap this up and spend now.

We got 12 of our 16 teams revealed from the action thriller bracket just to recap the devils advocate primal fear Mississippi burning and a time to kill and we have one more brackets go looking forward to that one.

Remind you to that you got your own legal question. Get in touch with Josh and Joe Whitaker Hamer law firm call the number 800-659-1186, 800-659-1186 or you can email your question to the show guys closing thoughts. Looking forward to this is next brackets will be tough for me.

The drama bracket. I got a really I don't want saw the movie ever man guided I'm looking for. You actually watch some of these movies on this show is drama. All right the liars Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer Whitaker Hamer law firm another show in the books will see on the radio next week is attorney licensed to practice law in North Carolina disappearing on the show. Maybe license North Carolina attorneys discussion of the chosen to be general in nature and in no way should the discussion be interpreted as legal advice.

We would like. Once an attorney licensed in the state in which you live at the opportunity to discuss the backs of your case with you. The attorneys appearing on the show are speaking in generalities about the law, North Carolina, and how these laws affect aboriginal Carolinian. If you have any questions about the content of the show, contact us directly

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime