Lost in the shuffle of big headlines at the end the Supreme Court Term was the decision to take on New Jersey’s challenge to PASPA, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, otherwise known as the “why you can only bet on sports in Nevada law.” But as guest Steve Silver of The Legal Blitz explains, this is a potentially huge state’s rights case directly linked to the Shelby County voting rights opinion.
Above the Law – Thinking Like a Lawyer
Supreme Court Betting On New Jersey
Intro: Welcome to Thinking Like a Lawyer with your hosts Elie Mystal and Joe Patrice. Talking about legal news and top culture all of Thinking Like a Lawyer here on Legal Talk Network.
Joe Patrice: Hello, welcome to another edition of Thinking Like a Lawyer, I’m Joe Patrice from Above The Law, and once again, my co-host here, physically in the room with me is Elie Mystal, and fully addressed.
Elie Mystal: On a previous Podcast, I made a request that somebody sponsor the podcast and send me a trenchcoat. My family who listened was very unhappy with that and wanted me to assure all of our listeners that I am fully capable of buying my own coats.
Joe Patrice: Oh yeah.
Elie Mystal: And I do not need the charity of others to dress myself. So, there you go, my sister.
Joe Patrice: Yeah, I don’t think — I certainly didn’t get that impression, I thought the impression, that was that you expose yourself and you need a trenchcoat. I thought that was what we were going for but —
Elie Mystal: I mean, so did I quite frankly and I was surprised to get the push back that I did, but there you go. I am capable of being clothed.
Joe Patrice: And we always – yeah, we always want to make sure that everyone gets the exact right impression about your state of address which is currently, though it not always is, but currently fully clothed.
Elie Mystal: Yeah.
Joe Patrice: Yeah, so, today we’re —
Elie Mystal: This week I feel like you wanted to grind some gears a little bit more even than I did.
Joe Patrice: It’s kind of a — it’s less of a grinding gears. I just think that a story came up this week, that is hilarious, and has legal overtones, and we didn’t really write much about it on Above The Law, but we wanted to kind of chat about it, because I do think this is kind of fascinating and from an IP situation. So, ‘Time’ magazine has reportedly sent a cease and desist letter to Donald Trump over the fact that he puts up in his golf courses this framed cover of ‘Time’ magazine talking about how great he is when he was on the cover of ‘Time’ magazine. The only problem is that it’s a fake, entirely fake cover that was doctored up, Photoshoped up to make it look like he was on the cover of ‘Time’ magazine.
Elie Mystal: It’s literally fake news.
Joe Patrice: It is in fact fake news, yes. And they’ve requested that he take it down and it got me thinking like what’s the claims here like, what’s going on?
Elie Mystal: I don’t see really where it is because I remember you go to the boardwalk and they have a thing where you put your head in the cardboard cutout and then somebody prints out “Time Person of the Year” kind of mock up for you. I feel like this is a service maybe not directly offered by the magazine, but like I definitely have seen people with fake person of the year cover shoots of them, and everybody knows it’s fake and it’s fun and whatever. It’s only Trump who apparently not – really it’s not – it’s only the kind of mouth-breathing idiots that go to Trump golf courses at this point who might look at that and think it was real, but I think up here amongst us illuminati, I think it’s well established that sometimes ‘Time’ magazine covers are fake.
Joe Patrice: Yeah, I mean that said they shouldn’t be, I mean, there is a reason it’s on a boardwalk that you get that in the same way that you can get knock-off Guccis down on Canal Street, that’s not that that’s okay.
Elie Mystal: Small business, yeah.
Joe Patrice: Yeah, small business stealing intellectual property, yeah. The problem I have — like I didn’t quite understand what the claimed against Trump himself would be because whoever is doing the business of putting fake ‘Time’ magazine covers out there, they are violating the trademark and potentially the copyright of ‘Time’ magazine. Copyright Times font and it’s a fairly generic one, so it may not be copyrightable. But it’s definitely a trademark and there’s some claim against the person who’s doing it, and there’s some delusion maybe claim of making them look like – ‘Time’ magazine look like it’s not a real news site that just does advertorial for billionaires. There might be some claim there, but those aren’t against Trump unless of course Trump is the person who ordered these fake things made then maybe there’s that claim, but it’s not that.
But I talked to Professor Sprigman from NYU to just get an actual like deep dive on what the legal issues here might be because the cease and desist letter isn’t out. His sense was that it’s an if he claim but then he thinks there might be a false endorsement claim here for ‘Time’. Because the magazine cover basically says, look at this guy, he’s a great guy, signed ‘Time’ magazine when ‘Time’ magazine didn’t really brightened, and then that’s sort of might be the basis for their claim.
It’s just interesting that as you pointed out the fake news thing is being thrown around and then here the literal only fake news is this, although not the only, there is actually another ‘Time’ magazine’s snafu which was few months ago earlier in the term. There was a picture of him in his — in the Oval office and there was a ‘Time’ magazine on the desk and that ‘Time’ magazine was actually a doctored cover too.
Elie Mystal: Really?
Joe Patrice: Yeah, but of a famous hoax it was – there was a right wing Photoshop of an old cover that had a penguin and ice on it, and that’s from the ’70s that said, “The Coming Ice Age” and they used it to say like in the ’70s he thought it was an ice age, now you are saying, global warming, you don’t know what you’re doing, but that’s not at all what that cover is, it’s a fake.
Elie Mystal: Do you think Donald Trump has ever read a ‘Time’ magazine covered cover, like ever in his entire life?
Joe Patrice: Oh, probably not. Oh, I mean, but who reads ‘Time’ magazine cover to cover?
Elie Mystal: Right now, but like Trump has been around for a while.
Joe Patrice: Yes, I mean, I never really felt of ‘Time’ magazine has a cover to cover kind of publication. I’ll read like this story I am interested in and move on, like ‘The Economist’ sort of cover to cover.
Elie Mystal: So, you definitely think that Trump has read a story in ‘Time’ magazine —
Joe Patrice: I mean, if his name was in it, I’m sure he did.
Elie Mystal: The whole story you think, really?
Joe Patrice: Maybe.
Elie Mystal: I would take that money. That’s a good segue because I would take that money.
Joe Patrice: There you go.
Elie Mystal: I would give you Trump never reading a full article in ‘Time’ magazine minus 150.
Joe Patrice: Okay, alright, I mean, I just feel like he sues so many people for scurrilous actually non-colorable claims of libel that he probably would, but that’s fair. Well, that is a great segue, good point. The segue is to guess we’ve had on a few times Steve Silver from ‘The Legal Blitz’. Welcome back.
Steve Silver: Hey, thanks for having me.
Elie Mystal: Hey, Steve.
Joe Patrice: Yeah, well, so we’ve got Steve back because the last time we were talking we were on a previous episode. We were talking about these New Jersey’s continuing exotic efforts to get sports gambling in the State, which is not allowed under Federal Law and it’s been litigated a few times and they keep failing but —
Elie Mystal: People don’t understand that, they think, oh, Atlantic City, you can gamble in New Jersey, you can’t gamble on sports in New Jersey, which New Jersey doesn’t understand why that’s so.
Joe Patrice: And on – well, everyone as we were kind of talking, everyone is concentrating on other things the Supreme Court did this week, the Supreme Court agreed to take that case, so we are going to get a definitive answer coming up.
Elie Mystal: Yeah, so, Steve let’s set that up. So, this Monday, the Supreme Court this week — sorry, I don’t know when people are listening. At the end of the term the Supreme Court decided to take a number of new cases. They decided to take the Travel Ban case, people are very interested on that. They decided to take Masterpiece Cakeshop case which is about religious freedom or gay rights depending on how you slice it, but that wasn’t the one that you noticed. So, tell us what else the court took?
Steve Silver: Right, it actually wasn’t the same day. It came out in their cleanup order so to speak on Tuesday. So, all the headlines are breaking about these major cases they are going to take and us to care about sports betting or sports in general, we’re kind of left hanging, and sure enough, cert was granted.
So there’s two cases that are consolidated into one and it’s I think important, the case titles are actually important because the one is New Jersey Thouroughbred Horsemen’s Association v. NCAA, and the other is Christie, as in Chris Christie versus the NCAA. So they are consolidated cases, same issues, but that Chris Christie in the Title I is pretty interesting considering his ties with the Trump administration and how the Solicitor General acted.
So the drill-down short version is New Jersey thinks that PASPA (The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act) is unconstitutional and they want legal sports betting, and in the court essentially going to decide, is that law which were approaching on almost 30 years of being on the books is that unconstitutional.
Elie Mystal: Now hasn’t New Jersey kind of litigated this before and lost and lost and kept losing, I mean, New Jersey is like the Mets on this on this issue.
Steve Silver: Right, this were going on 60 years now of litigation, so if you’re listening from New Jersey and I guess part of your tax dollars have been funding this for quite a while at this point, in the governor’s quest, but this actually started because the voters approved it in New Jersey that the voters voted with an overwhelming majority to in a sense legalized sports betting, it’s not as simple as that, but that’s what they voted for and so it went to the State Legislature, they created the laws and the regulations that it would be limited to the horse track than the casinos and created the whole regulatory scheme to have sports betting because their voters wanted it, their citizens wanted it.
Elie Mystal: Can you explain how it prevents New Jersey and as you’re pointing out New Jersey voters from having the sports gambling that they so richly deserve?
Steve Silver: Right, so New Jersey, I think it’s also important that for people to know that New Jersey had a chance to have legal sports betting back in the ’90s, so PASPA grandfathered in, which is why Nevada has sports betting, certain State, so Nevada said, okay, we’re going to have sports betting, Delaware was allowed to have a version of parlay card because that’s what they had on the book in New Jersey.
Elie Mystal: Sorry what? Parlay cards really?
Joe Patrice: Yeah.
Elie Mystal: In Delaware?
Steve Silver: Oh yeah.
Elie Mystal: Dude. All right, sorry, gone.
Joe Patrice: Elie just left the recording studio, on his way to Delaware.
Elie Mystal: And New Wilmington.
Steve Silver: Right, yeah, you got to keep going down 95 a little more, and I used to go down there when I was living in Philadelphia, but you’ve got to pick three or more events so to speak, and so, the theory is that you are no longer, I don’t know, since gambling you’re using more skill because you’re picking three or more outcome, but yes, you can have limited sports betting in Delaware. This is all because of PASPA and so the key language and the pretty short passage that said, “Unlawful for a governmental entity to sponsor, operate, advertise, promote, license or authorize…” and then it goes on, “lottery, sweepstakes, betting, gambling…” anything involving sport.
Now I’ve always argued and a number of others have that we have daily fantasy sports everywhere we look, how does that not violate path? And there are some fantasy sports cars out, but at the end of the day New Jersey couldn’t get their act together in the ’90s, PASPA goes into effect, New Jersey never was able to pass the law to actually create the regulatory scheme for sports betting and now we have Nevada cashing in, in New Jersey with Atlantic City on the verge of bankruptcy.
Joe Patrice: It definitely seems like this is, yeah, I mean, while there was a whole procedure today this operates largely as Nevada’s very powerful politicians getting their kind of kickback because they are preventing any discussion really of, hey, maybe we should let Nevada know, let New Jersey in on this.
Steve Silver: Well, I don’t know if that’s the case because at this point there’s only a few companies operating in Nevada and almost all of them have properties in Atlantic City, so they would want the additional revenue. The Internet company –
Joe Patrice: Although – well I’m thinking more of the tourists folks like, if I’m Harry Reid for instance, people have to come to me and spend dollars in Nevada as long as it’s the only game in town so to speak.
Steve Silver: Well — so it’s interesting you bring that up because in fact we know Nevada, you go to Vegas, you’ve got the sports book, great time, only a very small percentage, it’s less than 5% maybe it’s about 2 or 3% of all sports back in America take place in Nevada. So the people who are betting are betting. The money is going offshore or it’s going to the neighborhood bookie or it’s going between friends. So we know and –
Elie Mystal: So it’s not the legislative mafia, it’s the actual freaking mafia that is blocking legislation of this.
Steve Silver: Right, and so, well, you know and I’ve written for Above The Law or other sites that I always usually throw in a line about the bookie because they are the ones who truly stand to lose the most from that, but you bring up mafia, and I’d like to use another word ,which is ‘cartel’ the cartel that’s blocking this is the NCAA and to some extent the NFL and the other pro league, and it’s something that I think most people are shocked when I tell them and they don’t realize that PASPA specifically grant those sports league the same power as the US Attorney General to shut down sports betting, and in these six years of litigation up until the Solicitor General was asked to give opinion, the federal government has been silent, they are not the ones involved here and the feds are not the ones trying to shut down what New Jersey is doing.
Elie Mystal: Explain why the leagues want that because, I mean, I think so many people understand that the NCAA benefits when people bet on the tournament and National Football League benefits when people are betting on the games on Sunday, so explain it why the leagues want to officially formally limit gambling to just one state?
Steve Silver: Sure, so — and again, remember, this started six years ago and at that point we didn’t have an NHL team in Vegas, we didn’t have an NFL team in Vegas, and we had daily fantasy sports but not to the extent that everyone now knows about DraftKings and FanDuel and that most of these pro sports franchises have invested heavily. So the whole landscape has changed but the party line — to answer your question, the party line would be integrity of the game if your integrity of the game is thrown out left and right, but that’s –
Elie Mystal: It goes, oh no.
Steve Silver: Right.
Joe Patrice: I mean, they are just about the student-athletes, you know that, right? Yeah —
Steve Silver: Right.
Joe Patrice: — which is really about the classes.
Steve Silver: Well – and so the real reason behind that is money. If you had a way that sports betting would give the NFL extra revenue tomorrow, we already have injury reports value, and I mean extra direct revenue. They are very well aware that their rating on Thursday night blowout games are almost exclusively from people who have money on the game.
Joe Patrice: Yeah, there is no other leagues in.
Steve Silver: The leagues know that, that’s why they have injury report. I mean, truthfully that is why injury reports exist and there are rules now granted, Bill Belichick will always go into detail and hockey gives generic lower body injury report, but that’s why it’s for the better, that’s why every pre-game show talks about point-spread and favorite. There’s a massive amount of people gambling massive amounts of money, we’re just not taxing it or regulating it, and so the integrity of the game argument from NCAA’s standpoint is nonsense because you can’t bet on UNLV game in Vegas anyway, and the New Jersey has already said. They would for any events taking place in a State it would be pulled off the board.
Joe Patrice: So you don’t get to bet on the Giants and Jets.
Steve Silver: Well, no, no, no, just the NCAA.
Joe Patrice: Oh okay.
Elie Mystal: They don’t get to bet on Rutgers.
Joe Patrice: They don’t get to bet on Rutgers, well, that’s good, I can’t imagine there’s a spread big enough for Rutgers losing so that makes it –
Steve Silver: Well, right, or let’s say the NCAA were to hold a champion — a tournament event in New Jersey. They could pull those games off the board that’s already been done for decades. For the other leagues you already have Major League Baseball, the NBA, the Commissioner saying, hey, we’re going to revisit this, we’re in favor of maybe redoing the legislation, and NFL at this point, what can they say, they are putting a team in Las Vegas, how can they possibly say that the evils of gambling is somehow going to ruin the game, and I think the counter is – and my counter and my experience of living in reporting in Las Vegas is that you want the money track, you want the bets being placed at a sports book because there are ways in a lot of computer systems that are already in place internationally that can track unusual bet or swings of the line that might be signaled that there’s something nefarious going on, but you lose that ability if they are under the table.
Elie Mystal: It’s what they are bringing with the EPL.
Steve Silver: Surely, every now and then you hear about issues whether it’s soccer or with tennis where people are throwing matches or whatever it is and the reason we know that is because we know what the bets are. We can see how the lines move, but we don’t know that if all these things are taking place under the table.
Elie Mystal: So you’ve made a compelling case for why the leagues might be interested in allowing legislation to be changed here, but let’s also talk about the legal angle at court, how was — ever something that seemed like it passed muster under the Tenth Amendment, and I know, as a liberal, I just said the Tenth Amendment like it was a good thing. Lord, forgive me, but like it’s there and it has to — if it’s going to have any meaning doesn’t it have to have meaning for a case like this?
Steve Silver: Well that — and that’s going to be the heart of the argument and the court hasn’t mentioned kind of in passing in a few opinions and actually some of the listeners might remember the Shelby County case, Roberts has the opinion on that, right? So, well, I know you two do, but in the Shelby County case Ginsburg actually talked about past but in the dissent, as an example of the statutes that treat State differently that is this State something like that but they given the expansion of the notion of this equal sovereignty, and so that theme I think is going to come up here.
You’re going to talk about commandeering the State’s power and a lot of Tenth Amendment argument, it’s ripe with — just people if you’re interested in constitutional law this case ripe with them and I think it will really tell us a lot about where the justices are on the spectrum and really how of course they’re just going to continue to roll because you would think this is right out the state’s right, we need to limit the big bad federal government type of argument.
Joe Patrice: Yeah, it strikes me as though the Tenth — how they come about getting an answer on this is going to be interesting, because I think there are a few ways you can resolve this case, but I think there’s a lot, like you said, we’re going to learn a lot about the spectrum because I got to assume the conservative justices are very interested in making this Tenth Amendment case, federal government shouldn’t be telling states what to do with their gambling regulations whereas there’s the other argument that is, sure, the federal government can pass a law banning gambling if they wanted to, but you can say the federal government doesn’t get the right to say except for Nevada that there’s an argument that the disparate impact is the issue, which is kind of what Ginsburg was talking about with the Voting Rights Act, but how this gets resolved and what it means for other stuff, marijuana laws, voting rights, et cetera is going to be interesting.
Elie Mystal: I also think it’s going to be interesting to see how they are — especially for the conservatives being put in a box a little bit here in terms of some of the kind of social culture war issues versus some of these State rights issues, like I kind of agree with what you guys have said that, that it seems like there should be a slam-dunk case for a guy like Gorsuch to get the federal government off of your backs, but I also can see a guy like Gorsuch saying, oh goodness, no, we can’t have this gambling in this establishment, like I mean, that does put them culturally in a bit of a bind, because for whatever reason we still tend and treat gambling, as you know, like a major vise.
Joe Patrice: Almost as bad as dancing.
Elie Mystal: Almost as bad as dancing.
Steve Silver: Well, that’s exactly right, and I’ve been trying, I have been sitting here before I came on today trying to figure out how would he justice come down, it’s extremely hard to predict, you also have the — if you’re going to adhere to the text of the law and not undo what Congress wanted, does it just remain in play? But, I tend to think when you look at the history of the case where New Jersey has lost twice at the Third Circuit, one including a hearing in front of the entire circuit, they lost ten to two.
So you’ve got a clear law, the court asked for the views of the Solicitor General who says, you shouldn’t take the case, and they ignored him, which they don’t often do, the court usually – 80% of the time does what the Solicitor General did. So there’s at least four justices. We know that, who are very interested in this case and may be interested in a way of getting rid of PASPA, the question is, are there five? And who’s that for. So I believe, I would think they didn’t take this case just to affirm the Third Circuit.
Joe Patrice: Yeah, that would seem ridiculous, right, like what’s the point.
Elie Mystal: I feel, I mean, again, we’re kind of tea leaf grading here, but it feels to me like Roberts is going to be your swing here more than anybody, right? Because Lido, Thomas, Gorsuch, let’s put them all on the super state rights’ bucket. This actually seems like a kind of Tenth Amendment thing that Kennedy would go for. Roberts is the one who has to balance his kind of state right BS with his, well, Congress duly passed this law, I mean, it’s not like you can make the arguments the Congress didn’t know what it was doing.
Joe Patrice: Yeah.
Elie Mystal: I mean, sorry, you can always make the argument the Congress didn’t know what it was doing, I mean, this is a clearly passed law of Congress that they’ve had ample opportunity – the legislature had ample opportunity to change it if they want to and then especially with what you’re reporting, Steve, in terms of how the leagues themselves might be gearing up to change legislation, from a Roberts’ perspective changing these kinds of things legislatively is always preferable to changing them from the bench, so it really is going to be, I would imagine that he’s your swing.
Steve Silver: Well, that could be, but then you also have his — you have this Shelby County a thing.
Joe Patrice: Right.
Steve Silver: That’s his — this is hallmark of the equal sovereignty, and so, what do we do about that, what do we do when some states can do something and some can’t? It’s a really tricky interesting case, we also have some major heavyweights who are going to argue it, Ted Olson v. Paul Clement –
Elie Mystal: Really?
Steve Silver: Yeah.
Joe Patrice: Well, I’m not looking forward to handicapping this for my FantasySCOTUS league, which I am in fact in, and if you — if no one listening is in it by all means you should join the FantasySCOTUS league because it’s kind of a fun way of legal nerding your day and gambling. It’s not really gambling, there’s — I think some occasionally there’s a sponsor that awards like a Starbucks card to the top 10% of — at the end of the year or something like that, it’s nothing really much, it doesn’t cost you money, so it’s more of a giveaway.
Elie Mystal: It’s not SCOTUS 27:18.
Joe Patrice: Yeah, but it’s fun, try it, it was a lot of fun when there were only eight justices made it a little bit more difficult.
Steve Silver: Right. Well, I also wondered — and you guys maybe follow the court a little more closely to what extent does the court — how do they treat the Solicitor General, this is the same guy traveling around the country defending the travel ban, so how do they view his opinion and as part of this that they kind of saw him flip-flop from what we call Christie I and Christie II and that maybe they just don’t respect the administration’s views as much as they do.
Elie Mystal: Yeah, now I think whether or not Jeffrey B. Wall has any credibility, I think we have to wait to see really how they treat him in the travel ban litigation. It will be interesting on your point just to see the level of respect he is accorded while he is arguing this. Will it be the same as what Don Verrilli got or Elena Kagan got, I don’t know, because the lower courts have been straight up. The lower courts have not extended Wall on any court –
Joe Patrice: Department of justice at all, I mean, yeah.
Elie Mystal: So we’ll see.
Steve Silver: Right, and you also have another — another interesting footnote is Trump was an avid sports betting supporter when he owned a casino in Atlantic City and was very vocal about that, but now his administration is taking the position that we shouldn’t have it and sessions have come out saying, right, gambling is like dancing and it’s the devil’s work, so where do we go from here? This is a hot case and I think it has a lot of issues.
Joe Patrice: Well, I think this comes to what I’ve long surmised maybe an internal issue with the administration until Fox News mentions during Fox & Friends that sessions has taken that stance, Trump may not even understand that that’s what happened. So I’m interested in when they mentioned the administration wants to ban gambling in Atlantic City because I could imagine the administration’s feelings changing probably via tweet within about ten minutes of that.
Elie Mystal: Honestly, I mean, it sounds like you’re joking but you’re not, I mean, I think that you would be foolish at this point to think that Trump even knows this case is happening, has any idea what his administration’s position is on the issue and does not know where he is supposed to stand on this vis-à-vis his various constituencies. So there’s, I mean, again, like it’s sad, but you really aren’t joking when you say that we don’t actually know what Trump’s position will be on this until somebody on the TV tells him that this is an issue.
Steve Silver: If that’s true it’s also very sad for Chris Christie who has –
Elie Mystal: You mean Governor Reek —
Steve Silver: — this is about the only thing he has left and clearly Trump and his administration aren’t listening to him or don’t care.
Elie Mystal: Governor Reek has a long game and I don’t think that it’s played out yet, but Governor Reek absolutely thinks that sessions is going to resign or be forced out or there’s going to be some kind of fallout. Governor Reek still thinks that he will eventually be the 85th United States Attorney General.
Joe Patrice: I mean, yeah, I don’t know. Was he ever a prosecutor? He never talks about that. I guess, maybe he was. Yeah, this was — this is an interesting case, we’re going to be monitoring it going forward. Thank you so much, Steve, for joining us again and walking us through this again because, well, we’re all big gamblers so we — I actually going to go to Vegas in the near future, so I need to brush up on my sports bets.
Elie Mystal: I am so pissed about that.
Joe Patrice: You are pissed that I’m going. You’re not pissed that you’re not going, you’re actually more pissed that I’m going?
Elie Mystal: No, I’m pissed that — like — so ELTA, the big legal tech conference that I’m sure some of our readers — some of our listeners will be at, they have their conference in two places, we have one in DC and then they flip and they go to Vegas, and they go to back to DC and they go to Vegas, that’s just what they do, and so I was forced to go to ELTA last year when it was in DC. I went and I enjoyed it, but now that it’s in Vegas, oh, we’re only going to send one person as opposed to two, and so, Joe drew the short ELTA — aren’t you going to be like in Ireland though the week before?
Joe Patrice: Atlanta, but it’s like Ireland.
Elie Mystal: It’s like Ireland would lack people.
Joe Patrice: Because it’s also an island that sinks into the ocean, that’s I hope not Atlanta. Yeah – no, so I’ll be out there if any Vegas listeners are around during ELTA and maybe we’ll see if we can get something going, but yeah – no, so this is all a long way to say that I want to gamble and I’m going to ask for tips from you and Steve, so that’s all I got.
All right, but thanks again for joining us and thanks everyone for listening. If you aren’t already subscribed to the podcast via whatever method of subscribing you use, you should, that way you’ll get every episode. There’s the Legal Talk Network app that also allows you to listen to this show and other shows. You should read Above The Law, you should tell more people about reading Above The Law because it’s fun and we’re mildly entertaining people.
You should follow us on Twitter, I’m @JosephPatrice, he’s @ElieNYC, we tweet relatively interesting stuff back and forth.
Elie Mystal: And if you have a case, especially a Supreme Court or Federal Appellate case, should you think we should be focused on, don’t assume that we saw it already.
Joe Patrice: Yeah, because that one was slipped under our radar. Also, if you have questions ranging from and we’ve gotten several serious ones about our decision podcast about making decision about law schools, we might have to do another episode on some of those, even though it may not help the people actually asking those questions because it might be too late, it could be useful for others who may do one of those in the future, but don’t just limit the questions you email at I’m [email protected] and he’s [email protected] Email us those questions, any other things you kind of are interested about with the podcast, we can — maybe we’ll work, read them on air in a mailbag episode or maybe they’ll inspire a new episode and they can be ridiculous, I mean, one of my favorite football podcasts in the off-season has been doing podcasts where they’re like what’s the best grocery store and they just argue about it, like we could do ridiculous stuff, because that’s the whole point of Thinking Like a Lawyer. We would probably have some weird insights into grocery stores that would be very steeped in civil procedure, I’m sure.
But do all that sort of stuff, let us know, listen to everything blah… blah… blah… and give us your ratings and reviews on those subscription services that you have for the podcast that helps us get more stuff, and that’s it I think.
Elie Mystal: We just had a nice one.
Joe Patrice: Great, thanks.
Outro: If you would like more information about what you heard today, please visit HYPERLINK “http://www.legaltalknetwork.com/”legaltalknetwork.com. You can also find us at HYPERLINK “http://www.abovethelaw.com/”abovethelaw.com, HYPERLINK “http://www.atlredline.com/”atlredline.com, iTunes, RSS, Twitter, and Facebook.
The views expressed by the participants of this program are their own and do not represent the views of, nor are they endorsed by Legal Talk Network, its officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives, shareholders, and subsidiaries. None of the content should be considered legal advice. As always, consult a lawyer.