Outlaw Lawyer tackles Johnny Depp, Praying After High School Games & The Mask Mandate

This week on the Outlaw Lawyer, Josh and Joe take a look at some trials and national news and answer important earth-shattering legal questions such as, has Josh ever seen a movie starring Johnny Depp?

Didn't everyone's high school coach pray before and after games? Will we ever stop talking about mask mandates? That's all coming up on the Outlaw Lawyer. The Outlaw Lawyers, Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer, managing partners at Whitaker and Hamer Law Firm, practicing attorneys here in the great state of North Carolina and offices in Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay-Verita and Gastonia. And we talk legalese each and every week.

We have some fun with you. I'm Morgan Patrick, consumer advocate. If you've got a legal situation you're dealing with and you've got questions, I've got a phone number for you. 800-659-1186. That's 800-659-1186.

And just leave your contact information briefly what the call's about. An attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will be in touch. And you can always email your questions to the show and we'll use them and answer those on future programs. Questions at theoutlawlawyer.com. That's questions at theoutlawlawyer.com.

And the website, theoutlawlawyer.com. Visit and have some fun there as well. Guys, welcome into the program this week. Hope you had a great week. So we're not in studio. So I'm remoting in. So I'm sitting on the third, the third floor of the Garner office overlooking Highway 70 with my trusty cup of coffee, spurring me on to action today. Joseph, how are you? Hey, hey, Josh and Morgan.

I'm doing good. I'm in the second story of our Clayton office because we don't have three stories here. I do have infinitely better out of my window scenery than you, Josh. You know, nothing against Highway 70 and looking out and seeing it. But I've got the beautiful, beautiful main street of downtown Clayton, a historic downtown. And I actually get to look right out on the grassy area where all the concerts are held for the town. So great scenery, man.

Much better than a lifeless highway with cars running down it. You know, I picture your offices similar to what Coach K has had to deal with his entire time at Duke, where they erected the tower behind Cameron Indoor and the top two floors are Coach K's floors, or at least they were. And then, you know, the fourth floor was women's basketball.

The third floor was the athletic director and the athletic director's assistant. And then the Hall of Fame Museum is on that ground floor and you have to be thumb printed elevator in so you cannot get up there unless you have, you know, a print scan. So I'm assuming that the offices where both Josh and Joe, where you are located, have that kind of security and, and that kind of museum type feel when it comes to law. We've got the security for sure.

It's not high tech. There's no thumbprint scanner, but I have a very nice lady who sits at the front desk, and she'll tackle you if you try to come up the stairs to see me. Yeah, you got our, here in Garner, our second story, the staircase that gets you to the third story is very well hidden. It's like a maze.

So I don't have anybody who'll tackle you, but you probably won't find it if someone doesn't show it to you, so that's what I got going for me. I used to be a man of the people and I, you know, when I first, when I got my start, I was, you know, I was everything. I was my own receptionist and I sat on the ground floor. People would come in, they'd talk to me. I did that for a long time.

Um, but as I, you know, we, we started this radio show that was really the thing, man, turned me into, uh, just too much of a, a big shot now. So many screaming fans. I mean, you can't concentrate.

I mean, you have to put a hoodie on and I still wear a mask, even though there's no mandate just to hide my identity. The, uh, the hurricanes, uh, they clinched, right? So we're, we got one more game left this season. Uh, so it was Thursday night. So we're in the studio Wednesday morning. So I think Thursday night's the last game of the season and then we're, uh, we're in playoffs. Yeah. I mean, division champs, uh, going to be one of the top seeds in the Eastern conference.

It's a very, very talented field. Uh, I know, uh, Cain's fans are excited. They should be, uh, Hey, we're excited. I mean, they, uh, they've played some, some great hockey and, uh, as far as we know, pretty healthy, uh, going into, uh, postseason play.

So we'll see how it goes. You know, you can look at a lot of things, you know, strategically and like front office moves and things like that, that, that put the canes in this position. And, and you'd have a good point, but I gotta say, I think it's just our attendance at some of these games, Josh, that's really pushed the canes forward. Good vibes that that's exactly, we give them fantastic. And the, and it's funny cause I feel like they probably lost the majority of games that we've been there, which is crazy.

Cause they've been very good this year. Um, but overall I'm going to say that attendance by, by me and you, Josh has really pushed this team to another level. Yeah. I feel like the last four or five, we go to about half, we ended up at about half the home games between the both of us.

And I feel like the last couple I've seen have been, uh, I saw him beat the sabers. Cause that's the game where they broke a stick and the stick, I don't know if you guys saw this, but the, they broke a stick during play and the stick have to stick with flying up to like the, the tell, you know, what's the teletron or whatever it is. Yeah. The jumbotron. Everybody just watched it like everybody got silent and just watched it go all the way up and all the way back down.

But besides that game, I haven't seen a lot of wins. So, uh, but anyway, I guess it doesn't matter. Right. They did what they, they do what they had to do. Yeah.

They're in the post. And because obviously, Josh, you're a bad luck charm. You can come to the game, uh, uh, you know, this week, their final regular season home game on Thursday, obviously this, you know, our show is going to air on, on the weekend, but, uh, yeah, it doesn't matter. And then I get, uh, you know, we always like to talk about sports just a little bit to get us warmed up, to get the legal juices flowing. But, uh, I'm about tired of like Carolina and Duke having all this good news and basketball and state, you know, it's bad enough. We had to get through the season. What's the Duke good news? I haven't heard any Duke good news. Well, I mean, no news, I guess.

I don't know. Yeah, Duke had Duke's, uh, Jeremy Roach is coming back to Duke. That's, that's big. That'll be the first time that Duke has had a good upperclassman point guard in, in quite some time.

Um, but yeah, that's, you're, you're right. No, you know, that's the thing, you know, the Duke, you can expect virtually every freshmen that they bring in now to, to move on early. Um, and that's just, you know, it'll be interesting to see if, if John Shire changes the approach at all and, and how he attacks the transfer portal. You know, Duke kind of, some of this news kind of broke a little bit later. So I don't know, there's, I don't know what's left in the transfer portal for Duke to go after. I know they just got a transfer from Harvard. I think that was just yesterday. They, they announced that, correct me if I'm wrong, Joe, I think Duke has the number one recruiting class coming in.

They do. They've got a, they've got a very good recruiting class. I don't know that it's their best ever, but it's up there. It's top three recruiting classes that they've ever had.

But, uh, that's a dangerous game, man. You never know how that's going to pan out. And, uh, you know, it panned out pretty well for him last year, but, and it panned out pretty well for him in 2019.

But both of those years, they had kind of a transcendent, basically one of the best players in the country coming in out of the gate. And their, their guys coming in are very good, highly touted, highly rated. Uh, but, but you never know how they're going to, how that's going to translate.

Hopefully it translates very well. Yeah, I was just, last thing I'm going to say, guys, you can get into your discussion. I just, I'm not shocked that, uh, the Duke freshmen decided to go.

And obviously I think I'm, I'm with everybody else. It looked like they were going to do that. What I am shocked with is that Baycott decided to come back, uh, his, his stock, his stock has never, it will never be higher than it was at the end of the season. I mean, he was Mr.

Double double. I mean, the NBA is drooling over this kid. I'm going to come back for one more year and he's risking, he's risking a lot.

I admire him. Uh, but you know, in this, in this game with injuries, uh, that's, and he's not getting paid. Uh, and so he's, uh, he's going to play one more year. So I just find that I was more shocked by that than, than the Duke players leaving Carolina does that better than any, maybe college on earth.

Yeah. I mean, he'll, he'll get, he'll get some kind of, you know, some kind of endorsement deal, I'm sure. But, uh, it's not going to be the kind of money he would make if he is a, a lottery pick and he is a rebounding machine.

He can play defense, he can block shots in the NBA. That's what they want. And, but he, but he plays at Carolina, man. So he's coming back. That's what they do.

Carolina, they have more high, major five star top 25 type recruits that will return for multiple years. It's an amazing thing. God bless him.

Training table, training, training table food over there must be pretty good. But anyway, you see, and then you see that, uh, another thing that was shocking, you know, Oscar Shibuya, who was player of the year, national player of the year coming back. And I think I saw that he's something like a $2 million NIL bill, something along those lines. So I think that, that the NIL is really going to change the game as far as people who are borderline lottery picks, or, you know, a little bit iffy, you're going to see more of those guys come back now that they can be compensated for that final year. I think you're right.

All right, guys. Well, you never know what listening to the first five or so minutes of the show, but we actually do talk about legal things. So the outlaw lawyer here, one of the things that we like to do from time to time is take a look at trials that are in the national news and kind of, kind of take a look at them just, just like an attorney would. And, uh, so I've, I've got, uh, three, uh, trials here recently that made the national news that we're gonna talk about. The first one, uh, is going to be the Johnny Depp. I don't know if you would call it the Johnny Depp case or the Amber Heard case, uh, regardless of that case.

Yeah, that's what I would say. But, um, anyway, there's a defamation trial in Virginia that is, uh, taking over the headlines. It seems every day, uh, here for the past, uh, week or so. And so I figured we'd take a minute to talk about that and libel and slander and defamation and, uh, uh, that kind of thing. So we're going to take a look at that. And then, um, the other case that I've seen the most, uh, analysts of, uh, analysis of is the Kennedy v Bremerton school district case before the Supreme court that is about the football coach praying after games.

Um, and man, nothing makes people more riled up, no matter what side you're on, man, a good coach praying in school case, uh, those really get everybody, uh, worked up on, on either side. And so that's, uh, that was at oral arguments earlier this week, I think. So that one's been getting a lot of attention. So I figured we can spend some time on that. And finally, we had the mask, the CDC mask mandate on public transportation, uh, finally got struck down, uh, in Florida a week or two ago. And we haven't, we haven't all been together since that happened, but I figured that's definitely worth, uh, talking about.

Cause that decision is just getting appealed Joseph. Anything I missed there? Those are three big cases.

No, I think you got them all, man. And it's good that we get, we get to go back and talk about COVID. I feel like we used to be like a COVID exclusive type of show. We talk about it every week in some fashion. So, um, yeah, this is, it's, it's, it's, I think you hit every single topic and I think you got some good ones, man. You put this together. I always appreciate the hard legwork that you do in preparing for the show because I do so little of it.

So thank you. The outlaw lawyers, Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer, Whitaker and Hamer law firm is where you can find them during the week. They are the managing partners there. They're practicing attorneys here in North Carolina.

They have offices in Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay, Verina, and Gastonia. And we will talk more about the Johnny Depp Herd defamation trial. Uh, that's coming up in our next portion of the program. If you've got a legal situation that you're dealing with and you've got questions, you can get some answers. Here's the number 800-659-1186. Leave your contact information, uh, and briefly what the call is about.

Again, that's 800-659-1186. An attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will return your call. You can also email your questions to the program.

We'll use those, answer those on future programs. It's questions at the outlawlawyer.com. And again, a great resource is the website, the outlawlawyer.com.

We're back with more right after this. Welcome back in to the Outlaw Lawyers. Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer, your hosts, practicing attorneys, managing partners at Whitaker and Hamer Law Firm. And again, practicing attorneys here in North Carolina. Offices practically everywhere.

Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay, Verina, and Gastonia. If you've got a legal situation you're dealing with, you've got questions. We've got a phone number for you so you can get some answers. Here it is. 800-659-1186. That's 800-659-1186.

Leave your contact information, briefly what the call is about. An attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will be in touch and you can always email your questions to the program. Questions at the outlawlawyer.com.

Gentlemen, take it away. So Joe, the case we're going to talk about now is Johnny Depp, Amber Heard, defamation trial. So I always like to kind of set the stage so we know, I think in the court a lot of times, the media a lot of times will report on these court cases and they don't lead with, all right, where is this being tried?

Is this federal or state? What's going on here? So this is a state court case in Virginia between Depp and Heard who were married and were divorced. Is that right?

Does that sound right, Joe? Yeah, quite the tumultuous, quite the tumultuous marriage. And you know, this is, it's a very, it's a very interesting case. It's one of those things where, you know, if this was just regular people, you never hear about this. This isn't an outcome that affects really anybody but these two people.

There's no great legal precedent that's at issue here. This isn't going to change the course of history, but it's just an interesting thing because it's two people that are in the public eye. It's a case that, you know, it kind of got publicized before it even became a case because you heard the allegations from both sides in the news and the media over time. And it was just one of those very interesting things.

And in the case of Johnny Depp, you had potentially, I'd say he was one of the biggest, if not the biggest actor in the game for a long period of time. And in many ways, his career just kind of tanked in a lot of ways over the allegations of Amber Heard and the things that are at issue in this trial. So very interesting case, and it's something that's really kind of permeated social media. You've seen it a lot, especially recently in the last week or so, because it's kind of being live streamed, the trial is.

So you've seen a lot of video clips and little short clips, just taking things and putting them out there in the media. So it's just been a very interesting thing that we've kind of had a window into. Yeah, this is, I think, I think it's important that you said that this is not an important case, right? In the legal world, this case is just another case. And the only reason we even know about it is because both of the people in it are famous. And I can't believe that it's gone to trial. You know, usually people famous or not, you know, usually these kinds of cases are there. He said, she said cases.

This is a small claims court. This is Judge Wapner stuff. You know, this is, you know, usually you don't want your dirty laundry aired out in public. And so these cases rarely ever go to trial because even the party that brings it is just kind of hoping to work something out, maybe settle it.

Like, I don't think anyone intends to go in and have all your alcohol abuse, drug abuse, fights with your spouse, like just poured over by the national media. So the fact that this is even being tried is just bananas to me because, you know, defamation, libel, slander, these type of lawsuits are hard to win. We've talked about a couple on the lawyer in the past, but these are hard. These are hard cases to win.

They're very expensive to litigate and your dirty laundry gets aired and it doesn't sound like they have any problems. This is, uh, well, I'll tell you one, I'm going to speculate cause, cause I don't know this for a fact. If you look at it, especially in Johnny Depp's case, if you look at what, what these allegations from Amber Heard, you know, what, what kind of transpired in his career, what a toll that it took on him, um, you know, I almost would speculate that he, he's happy for this to go to trial and, and to put a lot of this stuff out there. Cause if you've watched his testimony, he seems very comfortable with a lot of the dirty laundry aspects, like his drug use. I think he kind of is comfortable with who he is and he's, he's kind of owned that. Um, and I think it's, it's more for him. I almost feel like he, he's happy to have a lot of this heard and to kind of clear the air through testimony of himself and other individuals and kind of put all this out there into the public eye and a more, you know, where it's all fleshed out and you get context and you can hear a lot of these things.

I think he's almost happy to have a lot of this heard and seen because I think if you look at it, at least from a public perception, what I've gathered looking at that is it seems like the public is kind of looking at him a lot more favorably the more that comes out of this. What's, you know, so it was, I had to read, I didn't actually know what started this case and I've seen it in the news, but I haven't paid a lot of attention to it. So I actually had to look at what started. And so Amber heard, uh, was approached by, uh, the sounds like maybe a nonprofit that represents, um, or tries to get the word out about domestic abuse, spousal abuse, and encourage her to write this op-ed piece that was published in the Washington Post. I don't ever read the Washington Post. It got bought by Amazon. Right. And I haven't, I don't think I've read it since then, but, um, and it didn't mention Johnny Depp by name, but talked about in the past couple of years, how she suffered this abuse, so it implied that he abused her and that's where the, and he, so he filed a defamation action. And in doing so, his attorneys released some, some statements from her that she thought defamed her. So she filed a counter, a counter claim for defamation. So we've got a double defamation lawsuit and, uh, again, we're in the studio, man, that's a, that's a, that is a rare one, but you know, whatever, and I can't imagine what these attorneys are charging for this case and then, you know, whatever outcome there is, I'm sure the other party is going to appeal. Right.

It's a heated case. Um, jury's going to come back. There's going to be an avenue for appeal. So this one's probably going to get appealed no matter, no matter what I was trying to think, what was the last, so she was what she was an Aquaman. Is that what she's famous for Aquaman? Uh, man, I don't know that I'd say she's famous for Aquaman.

The first movie that I'm not a scholar on Amber Heard, but the first movie that I remember Amber Heard being in was Pineapple Express. That's the first movie. I remember. Oh, all right. I am. I'm doing some research while you guys discuss.

Go ahead. I have seen Pineapple Express and enjoyed that movie. Yeah, that was kind of, in my opinion, that was her breakout role. She was the, the young high school girlfriend of Seth Rogan's character. So she was, she was in Pineapple Express. She was in a few things after that, but then yeah, Aqua. I would say probably Aquaman was, was most likely her, her, her biggest role that I can recall. All right.

So let me throw some at you. She got into the biz, first thing that we see, 2004, Jack and Bobby. She played Liz. She was also in Friday Night Lights. Uh, let's see. That makes, that's, that's something.

Friday Night Lights, the TV show, I'm assuming. Correct. Okay. Correct. I mean, well, I'm assuming that, uh, that might be, they actually had the movie too. Yeah, I think that's it.

I think that makes more sense. Yeah. And then, uh, let's see.

The Mountain, uh, the OC, uh, let's see, Alpha Dog, uh, Criminal Minds TV series she has been in. Okay. I don't know. This all makes sense.

But I, I, I'm gonna, I'm gonna say that that first big thing was probably that Pineapple Express. That's what I'm gonna say. All right. Let's see.

Californication. She was in that series. Okay. Let's see.

Yeah. A lot of these I haven't seen. You haven't seen anything, Josh. This is, this is a me and Morgan talk.

This isn't for you. Well, I am looking, when did Pineapple Express come out? I bet that was a long time ago. 2009?

Eight? Yeah, Aquaman was 2018. She was been in a couple of those actually was Pineapple Express. Yeah.

Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom is in post-production, so it has not been released. And they kept her, you know, there was some speculation she was going to get removed from that because there was, you know, if you, if you looked at how this played out, her, her op-eds published, there's a lot of backlash against Johnny Depp. Um, he, his career takes a big hit and then gradually it started to come out that it, you know, his allegations that she was actually physically abusive towards him and a lot of anecdotal things. You hear the story, like one of the wildest things is you hear the story of her eating it. And this is all alleged in the testimony that she ate a cheesy gordita crunch and then defecated in his bed. That was one of the things that, that was one of the things that was alleged, um, there's some wild stuff. If that's, if that's true, if that, if that comes out to be true, I'm sure she'll deny it.

I don't know how you prove it, but that was true. You should be de facto strict liability, crazy, right? That if you did that, doing the pooping in a bed, man, that's one thing. But to take that extra step to eat the cheesy gordita crunch beforehand. That's just a, that's a, that's like first degree bed pooping right there. That's premeditated. I'm going to get a Taco Bell needs to file in as a third party for this definitely like triple defamation.

No, man. Cause cause truth is a, is a defense to defamation. And I think they could call thousands of witnesses, uh, that have eaten cheesy gordita crunches or any Taco Bell food that could testify that, uh, it'll cause you some trouble, man. Defamation by defecation.

I knew it was coming. That's a, that's a legal, we're making light of this, but this is, it's an interesting thing. And one of the reasons why it's interesting is, is one you've got both parties alleging this abuse, but, uh, it's kind of a non-traditional thing. And it's something that you don't see a lot of where you've got a man that's, that's alleging abuse. And one of the things, one of the things that's been at issue here, and it was actually a soundbite that was played where, where you have misheard basically, uh, on, on audio stating, you know, go ahead, Johnny, and tell everyone that you were a man that was abused in and basically kind of berating him and belittling him and essentially saying that no one's going to believe him if he does this. Um, and that was kind of what his, that was actually what his, his team ended with when they ended his testimony. They played that clip and he was basically like, yeah, you know, yes I am.

This did happen to me. So, um, well, I know, I know it's tough to predict, but do you guys have predictions on how this may turn out? Oh man. I think my only prediction is that it won't be over, right? Over the jury fines, I think it's, I think it's getting appealed and, and I think that's safe.

And again, I'm going to go on back to, to kind of the motivation. I don't know that Johnny Depp, you know, it's, it's, it said that he didn't have a prenup when he, he married this, this seemingly very well balanced and calm and not crazy at all lady. And, uh, I, I think he probably lost a ton of money in the fallout from that in the divorce, but this is a guy who was, who was wealthy beyond anything we can understand. So I think he's going to be okay, even though his career took a hit, I think he's going to be just fine. I don't know that there's really monetary motivation for him.

I'm sure he wouldn't be upset with some kind of monetary reward, but I think more than anything, just getting all this information out into the public eye and kind of getting him some public vindication is, is really the reward for him in a lot of ways. What's the last thing he was in? Was it pirates of the Caribbean? Was that the last, the, the, the, the bad new Harry Potter movies. He was, he was in those and they, they, they recast them. They put the guy, uh, what's that guy, the guy who played a Hannibal in the Hannibal TV show. It's Mads Mikkelson. Is that the guy's name?

Not up on that series. No, no, it's a terror because it's bad. I think it's bad. I think it's, it's, I think it's really, what was the last good thing he did? Probably probably, Oh, you know what?

We do research on this show. So I haven't, I haven't seen the certified classic and they, they kind of took a dive sort of in quality as it continued, you know, started out hot and still decent, enjoyable movies, but I, you know, they, they suffered in quality the longer it went on, but it looks like, uh, the last good thing he was in and it's tough to say, man, it's the only giant up movie I've seen from beginning to end was, uh, Edward Scissorhands. And I saw it like 15 years after it came out. Yeah.

Yeah. Edward Scissorhands, you know, your kids never had you watch the, the newer Charlie and the chocolate factory. No, we boycotted it.

It didn't look good. No, uh, no fear and loathing in Las Vegas. Uh, I read the book.

No Donnie Brasco. No, I haven't seen it. Nightmare on Elm street, 1984. Hold on.

Which one was that? Yeah, Nightmare on Elm street. You've seen Nightmare on Elm street.

The original 1984. Yeah. Yeah.

Well, he was in that. Yes. Yeah.

I guess he was one of the boyfriends that, that, that bought it. Yeah. He got, he gets got, he was in platoon. I didn't know that.

Yeah. I remember him now. He was in platoon. He had a robust career and he became genuinely, I mean, it was really that pirates of the Caribbean that did it, but he's like I said, one of the biggest stars period. And he took a lot of risks too. I mean, uh, what's eating Gilbert great.

Um, he also did Ed Wood, which was just, you know, absolutely crushed, but a lot of people liked it. I mean, he's done, he's done some, some interesting work. Well, I'm gonna keep following this case. I've been, I've been following it in the New York times. I've been trying to, uh, not kind of look at the national media's 32nd take on it. I've been in the New York times has done a really good job of following this from beginning to end. So I'll keep looking at it. Is that our official prediction?

It doesn't matter who wins. It's getting appealed. I think that's going to be an official. Yeah, it's getting appealed. And just as a note on his, his net worth, it looks like they've got his current net worth at one 50 million. Uh, he, it was previously, it looks like around seven, 800 million.

So that shows you what the, the allegations plus the divorce kind of did to him there. The outlaw lawyers, Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer, you can find them at Whitaker and Hamer law firm. They're the managing partners there. And again, to remind you practicing attorneys here in North Carolina offices in Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay, Verina, and Gastonia. If you've got your own legal situation that you're going through and you've got some questions, we've got a phone number for you, 800-659-1186 that's 800-659-1186.

Just leave your contact information briefly. What the call's about an attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will be in touch and you can email your questions to the program questions at the outlaw lawyer.com. We'll answer those on a future program and please check out the website, the outlaw lawyer.com. So Johnny Depp and, uh, Amber heard that defamation trial.

We've talked about that and coming up, it will be Kennedy versus Bremerton school district. That's all next on the outlaw lawyer. The outlaw lawyers, Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer, managing partners at Whitaker and Hamer law firm offices in Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay, Verina, and Gastonia. I'm Morgan Patrick, consumer advocate. We talk legalese every single week and folks, there's going to be an opportunity. If you've got a legal situation you're going through and you've got your own set of questions, you can call this number, 800-659-1186. That's 800-659-1186.

Leave your contact information briefly. What the call's about and an attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will be in touch and you can always email your questions to this program. We'll answer them on the air. That's your programs, obviously questions at the outlaw lawyer.com gentlemen. What's up next.

All right, Morgan. We've got a big U S Supreme court case has been in the news quite a bit, uh, everywhere, everywhere I look ESPN, cause there's a sports angle was reporting on it the other day. Uh, but everywhere I looked, everything I read Kennedy, the Bremerton school district had oral arguments in front of the Supreme court.

This is the one where the coach, uh, I think Joe Kennedy, Joseph Kennedy is his name, um, praying after games. Uh, and then we'll talk about it. Cause this is, this is a weird case. Cause usually when things get to the Supreme court, they've been litigated ad nauseum. And when it gets to the Supreme court, there's a factual record.

Everybody has finally agreed on kind of what happened. A lot of times at the trial court, the first level, you know, the plaintiff has their version of the facts. The defendant's like, no, that's not what happened.

This is what happened. And that gets litigated and appealed. And so when you get to the Supreme court, everybody's agreed on some version of the facts. And so the Supreme court is just answering legal questions, questions about the law.

What tests do we apply here? Is this protected under the constitution? Did someone act, uh, unconstitutional? You know, so they're looking at legal things.

And so this case, I don't know that both sides agree on the facts. That was the biggest takeaway for me is, uh, the Supreme court's kind of having, having to decide what actually happened here, but it seems like the majority of, um, it seems like what, what happened is we've got a high school coach and after games, win or lose, he would go, uh, kind of maybe to the 50 yard line out on the field. Uh, he would get down on one knee and he pray out loud for 10 or 10 or 15 seconds, just a quick, you know, glory, all glory goes to God kind of thing. And this was real important to him.

And apparently he had been doing it for years and years and years. Uh, Joe, uh, I know I did not play high school football. Uh, Joe, you did play high school football, right? I did play high school football, several, several years of it, several glorious years.

Um, and, uh, and, and, you know, I played high school football at Clayton high school for the, the, uh, I would say local legend of a coach, uh, Gary Fowler, very old school, very old school guy, very old school coach, um, in Johnston County. Uh, so you can imagine we, we, we, we absolutely, we would pray before every single game and after every single game. And, uh, we actually had like a chap, like team chaplain that would, uh, would do that for us, but that was a big part of it. You know, that was a big part of it and, um, you know, it was never made a huge issue. It was not something that, that was made a big deal. It was not something that was really forced upon people, but, uh, you know, everyone participated for the most part. Like nobody was walking away or ignoring it. Like, I'm sure some, not every kid on the team was religious, but they would just kind of, they'd still take a knee. They'd still sit there.

They'd be respectful. Um, but, uh, it was just something that you didn't really think about it, man. It was just something you did, you know? And, uh, yeah, it was a big part of what we did. So tons of Supreme court cases, you know, uh, and you, you get into the free exercise clause clause in the first amendment, the establishment clause of the first amendment. There's a lot of constitutional, uh, things that play in this case and both sides. I think they're right.

Right. This guy's like, Hey, this I'm not in my official duties after the game, it's just something I wanted to do. Um, so he's like, my, my free exercise of religion should be protected because I'm not in my official duties.

The game's over. And um, and he's, you know, and, and then the school's like, Oh, you can't do this on, you are here on school grounds. You are in your official capacity. We can't establish, you know, we're a government institution.

We can't establish a religion. So both sides think they're 100% right, citing, citing kind of the same amendment. So it's, it's a, it's very interesting case, you know, looking at that argument, you know, there's taking out the argument of whether or not the coach should be allowed to, to do a voluntary prayer with the players who, who elect to do it with him. You know, the argument that the game is over, so you're not in your official capacity as a coach anymore. It doesn't, I mean, that doesn't really fly for me because you know, the game, a game can be over, but, uh, you're still the coach, you know, and you're still, you're going to the locker room. You're still, uh, you have, especially if it's like an away game, you still have custody of the players.

You're busting them back to the school. Um, so, you know, I don't know that the, the, that the argument that, well, the game is over, so I'm not in that, that capacity anymore. It really flies again.

And that's, that's completely ignoring the issue of whether or not, you know, this should be something that's allowed to happen. So, and I guess this is this something he's done for a while. I don't remember how many years, but this is something that's been going on for a while. And uh, you know, he'd go to the middle field after every game, take a knee and then some of his players would come out. Some players from the other team would come out. So it just got bigger, bigger, bigger, and then some coach from another team complained to the administration.

It was like, Oh, we didn't know this was really happening, which I don't see how that's the case. But, um, and then they, they told him to stop and he's like, no, I'm not going to stop. And he lost his job and this happened eight years ago. Right. So we're just getting to the Supreme court. So, um, he's been, you know, he hadn't had his job for a long time. That's a long time too, man, eight years, you know, you, you gotta think the landscape has really changed in a lot of ways in that period of time as well. But it brings up.

Yeah, it does. And it brings up a lot of interesting questions like this prayer in school has been litigated for, you know, a hundred years, you know, what, what can you do in school? What can't you do in school? And, and, and depending on what side you fall on, right. People feel very strongly, right. If you think, you know, I don't want my, I don't want my kid in public school praying or getting any, you know, kind of thought that one religion is preferred over the other. And then you got, you know, you know, Christian parents or whatever, like, Hey, my kids should be able to pray in school.

If they don't want to, your kids don't have to participate. And so you got these two sides that kind of butt heads and this stuff gets litigated all the time. Um, but it's interesting here because we have, and again, I think the fact, this is, you know, fact specific, we really need to know what happened. Like you said, um, we're trying to determine what's part of your official duty as a, as an employee, a government employee, a school employee, and what can you do and can't do.

And so that you can see the justices in the oral arguments. I kind of read the transcript and they're, they're peppering everybody with these fact patterns. Okay. Well, if we say this is wrong, what about this? You know, what if you, uh, during school text your spouse, you know, a little prayer or something, everybody's okay with that.

And then they just keep elevating. Well, what if your spouse comes by school and you, you pray in certain spots? And so it's, it seems almost silly to a certain point, but when you have these constitutional rights, you know, butting up against each other, the facts are, are very important. And so we don't have any evidence that any kid felt left out or, you know, felt that the school was establishing a religion.

So we don't have any, anything like that. It's just that the, it's just the sheer fact this happened, that's what, that's what triggered everything. Um, but it, it's, it's very interesting. If nothing else, it's interesting.

It is. It's very interesting. And like you said, that one of the most interesting aspects of it is the, is the idea that the facts are not, you know, fully agreed upon and settled at this point. You know, like you said, most of the time, something gets to the Supreme Court.

Facts are, are iron clad, man, set in stone. There's no dispute and it's just a question of law, but, uh, the fact that there's still some factual, some factual questions, uh, it's, it's of interest. And you know, I think it makes it, it almost makes it likely that you're going to see this kind of kick back for some, some clarification on those facts prior to making a ruling on the law. Well, you know, the Supreme Court justices couldn't even decide what kind of case this is. They're like, all right, is this a free speech case? If so, we apply this test is this is an establishment clause case. We apply this test.

Is this an, just an employment discrimination case? Cause then we need to send it somewhere else, you know? So they were struggling to figure out what are we dealing with? You know, what, what is this?

I think that's, what's going to happen. I think this one, the, the, the attorneys were arguing very hard for the Supreme Court not to, to send it back to the trial court level to, to figure things out. Like, look, it's here.

Let's, it's taken this long. It's just been eight years, but there's a, there's a good website out there. If you ever want to learn more about some of the things that we brought up, there's a Supreme Court of the United States blog, it's a SCOTUS blog, and they do a good job of following a lot of these and that's where you can get a lot of oral arguments and kind of find out what's happening. A lot of times the news will just summarize like, Hey, this happened and, and maybe this is what it means going forward, but I like to see how these things kind of come, come together and, and seeing the justices in action, you know, seeing what questions they ask and what they're concerned with is, is always adds a little bit more to it, but that, man, they were all over the place. There's no, there was no Supreme Court unity on this one that came and came and decide what kind of case it is. So it'll, Yeah, that's the thing, man.

What, what tests do they apply? That's going to be, that's the real question. And uh, I think with all this uncertainty, man, not even under, not even fully knowing what type of case this is, what standard is applied, how it's approached. I'm going to, I'm going to neglect to make it at a prediction on this one. I think it's unsafe for our Sterling 100% record to make a prediction. Right. Yeah.

We can't, we can't risk that too much, too much at risk. The outlaw lawyers, Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer. You can find them again at Whitaker and Hamer law firm.

They're the managing partners. They're also practicing attorneys here in the great state of North Carolina offices, conveniently located Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay, Varina, and Gastonia. If you have a legal situation, you've got questions, listen to this phone number, jot it down and call at 800-659-1186.

That's 800-659-1186. Leave your contact information briefly what the call is about and attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will be in touch and you can always email your questions to this program. We'll answer it on future programs, questions at the outlaw lawyer.com.

We're back right after this. Welcome back into the outlaw lawyers, hosted by Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer, managing partners at Whitaker and Hamer law firm, offices conveniently located Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay, Varina, and Gastonia. They are practicing attorneys here in North Carolina. If you've got a legal question, again, we talk legalese each and every week. If you've got a legal question of your own, you can call this number, 800-659-1186. That's 800-659-1186 and leave your contact information briefly what the call is about and an attorney will be in touch. You can also email your questions to the program, questions at the outlaw lawyer.com. We'll answer those on future programs. I'm Morgan Patrick, consumer advocate. We'll go back to the guys.

What's next? Well, Morgan, we haven't sat down and talked since the mask mandate. So there was a, you know, I think everybody knows, like if you were getting on an airplane, you still had to wear a mask until about a week or so ago. So the CDC still had a mask mandate basically for public transportation. I think, I think at least around where we're at here in North Carolina, you know, most of the schools have dropped their mask mandate. Most of the counties and cities and most of the private businesses, you know, that, you know, so I don't even carry my mask anymore.

I never thought we'd get to this day. I used to always have a mask in my pocket. I don't, I don't have it anymore. I went to the doctor the other day and they still require one in the healthcare setting, which makes sense, I guess.

But I had to borrow, I had to ask for one because I didn't have one. But anyway, the airplane mask mandate has been making a lot of people angry both ways. It always interests me to see an issue that makes, you know, both sides of the issue, like just irate, you know.

And certainly this is one, right? You know, the violence on airplanes and everything have spiked over, over this mask mandate and this one seemed to survive everything else going away. So it was making people even more angry, right?

This was like the last, the last mask mandate. And I saw a lot of people report on this and I didn't really understand how the case got started. So that's one of the things I went back and looked at. Joe, I don't know if you've had a chance to look at that yet. Yeah. So, you know, what we have here, basically, we've got the plaintiffs in this lawsuit are two women.

And we will just, we'll not say their name, we'll just say they're two women. And they, along with the Health Freedom Defense Fund, which is a Wyoming nonprofit that's kind of challenged a lot of the COVID vaccine and mask mandates, they're the ones who brought this suit. And basically they alleged that the CDC mandate was arbitrary and capricious since it gave exemptions to certain groups like children under two years, two years of age, but not other people. So they basically said that, again, it was arbitrary. So you had the U.S. District Court Judge Catherine Kimball Mizell, who's the judge for the Middle District of Florida, called the policy unlawful and ruled that the CDC had overstepped its legal authority by imposing the mandate in February of 2021.

So you had a lot of people who got super fired up, like you said, on both sides. And this judge has now come out and basically said that the CDC essentially did not have the authority to do so and that it was an unlawful mandate. You know, so when you hear on the news that there's been a federal judge struck down this or a federal judge did this, one thing they never tell you is how it got started, right? Because this was a nonprofit and then two women who apparently had suffered damage because of this, the damage, I guess, being flying and being forced to wear a mask. And that's what got in front of a judge, right?

Judges just don't arbitrarily review the actions of the CDC. You need an aggrieved party. You need a plaintiff. You need a controversy.

You need some damage. So all these things have to be in place. And there's a lot of nonprofits out there who go around and try to find plaintiffs for these actions. You know, anytime somebody strikes, you know, gun law is getting challenged, there's usually a nonprofit that's found someone, you know, who technically has been affected. But bringing a federal lawsuit takes money.

That's not an inexpensive thing. So for me, it's always fascinating how something like this got started, how did it get before this judge. And, you know, a lot of these nonprofits, we don't really, I'm going down a side road here, but forum shopping, right? They find a forum, a state court or a federal court where they think that court may be favorable to their side. And so here they ended up in Florida and they won, at least temporarily. You know, that was an injunction type matter. So right now, masks are optional and the CDC, I think, has appealed that.

So in a couple of weeks, there'll be another argument and we'll see if that stays the case. But for right now, and I've flown a couple of times during the pandemic. One was like a five hour trip and that mask, that's rough. I'm already uncomfortable on a plane because I'm a bigger guy and so I'm barely fitting the seat as it is. So I'm already uncomfortable and I don't even care about the science. You can tell me all day, like you're safer with a mask and I believe you.

That makes, that makes sense to me, but man, I don't want to wear on a plane, uh, for however many hours you're stuck on that plane and already uncomfortable, but that's just me. You know, I was, I was actually with you on that flight. You're referring to Josh and I was sitting right across the aisle and I can, I can confirm for the listeners, you were very uncomfortable, man. I could see it, even with the mask on your face, just your body language, I could see it. And, uh, I could tell that you were having a bad time.

You were not enjoying yourself whatsoever. And um, you know, we, it's very, like you said, you get, it's amazing how quickly, at least for me, how quickly you get used to some of these COVID based things that have that kind of became a part of our everyday life and having the mask and the expectation that you need the mask anywhere you went and carrying that mask with you everywhere. And then how quickly, like you, man, I don't have a mask anymore.

I don't carry it with me. If I go somewhere that need, that requires that I have to borrow and uh, you know, the shift to the mask and then away from the mask has been really, it's been really drastic man. And it's, and it's, but we always long for that normalcy again. You know, anytime we talked about COVID, we would kind of speculate when will, will it ever be normal? Will we ever return to kind of a feeling of normalcy and I'd say we've gotten pretty dang close to it, man. Yeah.

A good question. It's not a legal question, but you know, there will be, you know, COVID will spike again and uh, and, and I guess it depends on the variant and how people are holding up to it. But you know, we're, we are, I do feel like I have the sniffles today and uh, you know, I woke up and I wasn't terrified, you know, I was like, maybe I just have a, maybe I just have some allergies or a little bit of a cold. So for, for the first time in a while, I was like, yeah, maybe I just got a cold and you know, I'll be, I'll be all right.

But you know, I didn't, I don't feel the need to self isolate for 10 days and, and take a lot of rapid tests and all that good jazz. So maybe we are, uh, we are getting on down the road. You know, the, the CDC has, uh, has an argument that, Hey, we need to be able to do this for public safety. And this is within, I think we've talked about agencies before Joe, but the Congress, all this power rests with Congress and they set up these agencies and give them this broad declaration, all right, you're in charge of public safety and you can do this, this and this.

And, and so these, uh, I don't say this to be derogatory, but they're bureaucrats right in the CDC. Um, and so they, they wield these unelected people, wield a lot of power that Congress has delegated to them. And so that's what the judge said is, Hey, you guys have exceeded your congressional authority by, by doing this. And so their argument's going to be, we have not, this is in our, you know, purview of things that we can do and things that Congress has required us to do.

And, and, uh, we need to be able to do this because if it does spike again, we need to be able to know that we can Institute this ban. So I don't know that the CDC exceeded their authority. I haven't seen the specific legal arguments cause they're not widely available, but I, I don't know that they've done, you know, if they've exceeded their authority, they can't do a mask ban on public transportation.

Seems like that's probably in their wheelhouse and they, they can do that. Uh, this is my thought. Yeah, but that's, you know, that's your thought, but then you look at what the judge says and, and there, you know, clearly her, her holding is that that mask requirement violates the procedures for that agency rulemaking.

And that's kind of where this was, where this ended up being struck down. But uh, you know, it's regardless, it's gone. The mask mandate is gone and uh, there's, it will be interesting to see what it would take, you know, and, and, and God willing, we'll never have any kind of crazy spike or crazy new variant, but I'd be interested to see what it would take to get us back to that same level of restriction because you're going to have so much more resistance from people. I feel like after the, you know, after everything that's happened and after all these things have been lifted, you know, it would almost, I almost feel like it would take some kind of something really drastic to push us back to that point. Well, I think too, we'll always have folks that wear a mask now, right?

It doesn't matter that they're not required. And certainly if you feel like, you know, you need to wear a mask or you've got, you know, some other health issues or something by all means. Um, but I think it'll, you know, we'll, we'll have a mask around for a long time, but yeah, and that was a lot of, that was the argument for a lot of the folks who opposed the mandate is that no one's preventing anyone from wearing a mask.

If you want to wear a mask, wear a mask, you know, wear six masks, but, but don't tell everyone that they have to wear a mask. That was, you know, that was, uh, the position that was pushed by a lot of these anti mask folks, the outlaw lawyers, Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer. You can find them at Whitaker and Hamer law firm managing partners, their practicing attorneys here in North Carolina offices in Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay, Verina, and Gastonia. We're going to take a short break. We'll come back. Welcome back in to the outlaw lawyers, Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer managing partners, Whitaker and Hamer law firm offices in Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay, Verina, and Gastonia, and practicing attorneys here in the great state of North Carolina.

If you've got a legal situation you're going through, take this number down, 800-659-1186 if you've got questions, call the number 800-659-1186 leave your contact information briefly, what the call is about and an attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will be in touch and you can always email your questions to the program questions at the outlawlawyer.com and we will answer those questions on a future program and please check out the website, the outlawlawyer.com guys wrap it up for us, Joe, I have a, a non legal question that has been bugging me for like two weeks. I'm going to ask you the question, is that all right? Yeah. I'm so I'm prepared. I'm fully prepared for your question. What do you think, what do you think the percentages of people in, in our, in our society who have a cell phone, but who have either not set up their voicemail or their voicemail box is perpetually full?

72%. Right. I think it's a very, like everybody I've called back in the past two weeks now, you know, these people have called me, I'm returning their call, um, no voicemail or voicemail boxes full. What's, what's the, what's the professional, uh, acceptable way to deal with that. Do you just say, Hey, I've returned your call. Hopefully you'll see you missed the call.

Is that, is that where you're a little older than me? And, and, and I think that as, as we age and as our kids get older, the voicemail is going to be a, a thing of the past. It's going to be irrelevant because you're going to have, you're going to text someone, you're going to email someone, there'll be some other form of communication we don't even know about. Um, I'm not a big voicemail guy myself, man.

I'm one of those people who do not have it set up or it stays full and then I'll clear it out and then it'll get full again. I'll just listen to any of them. I might read the transcript if I get a transcript, that's right. That's all you're getting from me. But like in a professional setting, like someone has called in an office, which is clearly not a, I guess some people's offices may be a cell phone, but our office is a, an office that you've got a phone system and, and so you've called them back. So it's not like you can assume it's a cell phone and you can just text them and be like, Hey, what's up?

You called me, you know? So I guess that's the new voicemail is, Hey, I called you and I guess you'll see it or you, you might not see it. I think our voicemail actually tells you like, email us, like, why are you doing this? You should just email us the, uh, yeah, well, it's something that's been puzzling me.

I've been, I've been trying to, I've been thinking about that, like, cause that's happened so many times in a row. Um, that's one of the big questions that I'm grappling with the biggest non-legal question I'm currently grappling with. I tell you, we get into all kinds of legal discussion here on the program, the Outlaw Liars, Josh Whitaker, Joe Hamer, managing partners at Whitaker and Hamer law firm. We do it each and every week and you can find them at the offices, Raleigh, Garner, Clayton, Goldsboro, Fuquay, Verina, and Gastonia. They are practicing attorneys here in North Carolina that are managing partners at the firm. If you've got your own legal question and you need an answer, we've got a phone number for you, 800-659-1186. That's 800-659-1186.

Leave your contact information briefly. What the call's about an attorney with Whitaker and Hamer will be in touch and you can email your question to, to the program. Questions at theoutlawlawyer.com will answer it on a future episode.

We're in the books for this week. We'll talk to you next week right here on the radio. Outlaw Lawyer is hosted by an attorney licensed to practice law in North Carolina. Some of the guests appearing on the show may be licensed North Carolina attorneys. Discussion of the show is meant to be general in nature and in no way should the discussion be interpreted as legal advice. Legal advice can only be rendered once an attorney licensed in the state in which you live had the opportunity to discuss the facts of your case with you. The attorneys appearing on the show are speaking in generalities about the law in North Carolina and how these laws affect the average North Carolinian. If you have any questions about the content of the show, contact us directly.