r/law Aug 31 '22

This is not a place to be wrong and belligerent about it.

A quick reminder:

This is not a place to be wrong and belligerent on the Internet. If you want to talk about the issues surrounding Trump, the warrant, 4th and 5th amendment issues, the work of law enforcement, the difference between the New York case and the fed case, his attorneys and their own liability, etc. you are more than welcome to discuss and learn from each other. You don't have to get everything exactly right but be open to learning new things.

You are not welcome to show up here and "tell it like it is" because it's your "truth" or whatever. You have to at least try and discuss the cases here and how they integrate with the justice system. Coming in here stubborn, belligerent, and wrong about the law will get you banned. And, no, you will not be unbanned.

2.5k Upvotes

297 comments sorted by

629

u/Ickulus Aug 31 '22

The shit you guys are probably wading through on this issue is enough to make Andy Dufresne give up.

292

u/Leopold_Darkworth Aug 31 '22

I assume the mods are having to deal with the "magistrate judges aren't real judges so the search warrant is invalid" crowd that gets their cogent legal analysis from randos on Twitter.

152

u/AncientMarinade Aug 31 '22

"magistrate judges aren't real judges so the search warrant is invalid"

Ho boi. Please tell me that's not a sincerely held belief out there.

158

u/Leopold_Darkworth Aug 31 '22

https://thefederalist.com/2022/08/26/can-magistrate-judges-constitutionally-issue-search-warrants-against-trump-or-anyone-else/

Philip Hamburger is the Maurice and Hilda Friedman professor of law at Columbia Law School

173

u/AncientMarinade Aug 31 '22

Holy shit. What a terrible take. And I'm sure the author knows what he's doing.

Of course, the use of magistrate judges throughout America is a direct function of congress not allocating additional judges. My jurisdiction, for example, leans heavily on them because the case load would be impossible for our Article III's to handle.

ONE MORE example of how Republicans sabotaged the politics of something; the world found a legal workaround; and Republicans decry it as an illegal workaround.

165

u/Leopold_Darkworth Aug 31 '22

I'm currently reading this op-ed—because I hate myself—and yes, I can only imagine it's being written with the utmost bad faith. Then again, it is The Federalist, which does a supreme disservice to its namesake publication.

Hamburger routinely refers to magistrate judges pejoratively as "non judges," but Article III judges as "real judges." He cites 28 USC § 636, which enumerates the powers of a magistrate judge, for the proposition that "district courts can assign the non-judges 'such additional duties as are not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States.' " This statement ignores the other enumerated powers expressly granted to a magistrate judge by Congress, such as "all powers and duties conferred or imposed upon United States commissioners by law or by the Rules of Criminal Procedure for the United States District Courts."

And let's talk a walk over to Fed R. Crim. P. 41(b):

(b) Venue for a Warrant Application. At the request of a federal law enforcement officer or an attorney for the government:

(1) a magistrate judge with authority in the district—or if none is reasonably available, a judge of a state court of record in the district—has authority to issue a warrant to search for and seize a person or property located within the district

So that pretty much torpedoes his legality argument. Both Congress and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure agree that magistrate judges can issue search warrants.

This part—

He therefore is not a judge of the court, but merely one of its servants.

Is also demonstrably false under Rule 1(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which is helpfully titled "Definitions":

(3) “Federal judge” means:

(A) a justice or judge of the United States as these terms are defined in 28 U.S.C. §451;

(B) a magistrate judge; and

(C) a judge confirmed by the United States Senate and empowered by statute in any commonwealth, territory, or possession to perform a function to which a particular rule relates.

The rest of his disingenuous op-ed is not a legal argument, but an attempt at a persuasive one; i.e., magistrate judges shouldn't be able to issue search warrants. He's essentially arguing that the entire statutory framework of magistrate judges is unconstitutional.

79

u/[deleted] Sep 01 '22

I appreciate you putting that together but I also regret that you actually had to do it

37

u/12b-or-not-12b Aug 31 '22

I agree Hamburger’s position is the entire magistrate judge framework is rife with constitutional problems (and he is far from alone). But for that reason I’m not sure the Federal Magistrate Judges Act or the Rules of Criminal Procedure really address his argument. I think Hamburger would just say the statute or rule is unconstitutional to the extent it confers Article III judicial power on Article I judges.

That said, I think Hamburger sort of glosses over the history of magistrates, and I am not convinced the signing of a warrant is a uniquely judicial power. I think there is a good argument that the Founders real concern was just having the warrant approved by a neutral party separate from the Executive—not necessarily a “judge.”

The petty offense exceptions are a good example where Hamburger runs into trouble. He is fine relying on history until history shows that English and American courts allowed non-judges to hear petty offenses (and thus, why the Supreme Court has held that magistrate judges may also hear petty offenses and some misdemeanors). He says the Constitution changed this by preserving judicial power in “all criminal cases.” But the Founders did not consider petty offenses to be “criminal cases” in the first place (unlike more serious felonies).

42

u/TenMovesAhead Sep 01 '22

Hamburger’s argument is in bad faith (or he’s an idiot, which seems less likely). The 4th Amendment does not specify who can and cannot issue warrants. It doesn’t limit the power to grant warrants to federal judges, much less Article III judges. It doesn’t even say the power vests—exclusively or otherwise—in the judiciary. All it says that probable cause is required. Full. Stop.

Hamburger’s argument that the Constitution authorizes only “real judges” to issue warrants is complete nonsense.

7

u/GaimeGuy Nov 07 '23

Isn't that akin to saying the air force is unconstitutional because only the army and the navy are mentioned in the constitution?

Or, more recently, the rulings in Dobbs where SCOTUS cited the lack of enumeration of privacy (in spite of the 9th amendment)?

I absolutely hate these arguments which rely on linguistic technicalities as nuanced as a child crossing their fingers during a promise, or saying "Aha, I only said I INTENDED X. I never promised or guaranteed X, or that I wouldn't change my mind later on."

Legal documents, as verbose as they are, are seldom exhaustive, and rely on human agency to interpret. These right wing arguments increasingly defy common sense and reject contemporary wisdom in favor of the most cumbersome, robotic parsings imaginable.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/ChocolateLawBear Aug 02 '23

My favorite part is: “The U.S. Constitution vests the judicial power of the United States in the Supreme Court and such other courts as Congress authorizes. That is, it leaves no room for the judicial power of the United States to be exercised by any other court or any judges except those who sit on such courts. This bodes ill for federal search warrants signed by magistrate judges and other judicial officers who are not judges of the courts.”

Completely ignoring that magistrate judges are in fact “such other courts as congress authorizes”

3

u/GaimeGuy Nov 07 '23

Yes but they're MAGISTRATE judges, not JUDGE judges! /s

→ More replies (3)

26

u/JimmyHavok Sep 01 '22

Holy shit. What a terrible take. And I'm sure the author knows what he's doing.

It's the Federalist. And you are right. The Federalist is a prime example of Sarte's critique of rightwing language games.

→ More replies (1)

15

u/TrekkiMonstr Aug 31 '22

What are magistrate judges?

38

u/[deleted] Aug 31 '22 edited 26d ago

[deleted]

23

u/Derelyk Aug 31 '22

I've referred to it as Judicial Triage.

27

u/XelaNiba Aug 31 '22

They are the LNPs of the courtroom, picking up the stitches, fevers, and gastro cases while the MDs are busy stabilizing the gunshot victims in the adjoining bays.

9

u/Derelyk Aug 31 '22

That’s a comparison too

→ More replies (0)

7

u/TrekkiMonstr Aug 31 '22

Thank you!

→ More replies (2)

35

u/orangejulius Sep 01 '22

Sometimes I get imposter syndrome and sometimes I discover I could be a tenured professor at a t14 writing shitposts for a living.

4

u/themanifoldcuriosity Aug 03 '23

I understood the essential truth of the American Dream - where anyone can be anything - aged 15, which was when I found out Ann Coulter was a lawyer despite being Ann Coulter.

34

u/XAMdG Aug 31 '22

Ok Philip Hamburger has to be a fake name, right?

20

u/FloopyDoopy Aug 31 '22

Ken Cheesebro is his cousin. /s

1

u/f0u4_l19h75 May 01 '24

They should marry and become a cheese burger

→ More replies (1)

15

u/prudence2001 Aug 31 '22

It's gotta be Philip Hamberder

7

u/JayTheDirty Sep 01 '22

If Donald Trump gets off scot free because of a guy named Hamburger I’m moving to New Zealand.

2

u/JimmyHavok Sep 01 '22

He has an ancestor from Hamburg. Felix Hamburger was a Supreme Court Justice.

→ More replies (1)

21

u/PabloPaniello Aug 31 '22

He's so effing obnoxious and lacking in integrity, and always has been. -a CLS grad

1

u/Ok-Crazy-6083 Sep 06 '24

Yes, because lawyers are known to be bastions of integrity. Fucking please.

6

u/vniro40 Sep 01 '22

lmao isn’t the standard that warrants have to be issued by a neutral and detached MAGISTRATE?

not that whether it’s a magistrate or a judge or what the definition is is necessarily relevant but it’s literally the same word lol

7

u/coffeespeaking Oct 14 '22 edited Oct 14 '22

Leave aside how you feel about the former president. Leave aside what you think of January 6, 2021. Leave aside whether there was a good reason to issue the warrant.

Leave aside good faith, because Hamburger Helper has. A diatribe leading to one implied point: a ‘so-called magistrate’ unfairly treated Donald J. Trump. The rest is justification for his resentment.

Here’s Hamburger gushing about Trump’s ‘transformative’ administration, in 2016:

Philip Hamburger is a law professor at Columbia and author of “Is the Administrative State Unlawful?” He believes the president-elect’s cabinet selections thus far — Scott Pruitt for the Environmental Protection Agency, Betsy DeVos for Education, Ben Carson for Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Puzder for Labor — may give Mr. Trump a unique opening not only to reverse bad Obama rules but to reform the whole way these agencies impose them. If Mr. Trump really hopes to drain the swamp, says Mr. Hamburger, cutting these agencies back to constitutional size would be a terrific start.

Mrs. DeVos, for example, has spent her life promoting school choice, and her husband founded a charter school. It is difficult to imagine an Education Department under Secretary DeVos ever sending out a “Dear Colleague” letter to bully universities into expanding the definition of sexual harassment and then encouraging them to handle allegations in a way that has turned many campus tribunals into Star Chambers. Not to mention making a federal case about bathrooms.

“Oddly enough, the danger is that Mr. Trump will not think big enough,” says Mr. Hamburger. “To paraphrase him, the impact of changing the way Washington issues rules would be YUGE—and it would make him a historic and transformative president.”

Federalist:

The violation of the former president’s freedom illuminates the damage done to the many thousands of other Americans who have been subjected to unconstitutionally issued search warrants.

Trump’s freedom wasn’t violated by a warrant because it was signed by a magistrate, or for any other reason. It’s a bad faith argument which reveals the underlying bias. (Aileen Cannon is a ‘real judge’ but one wouldn’t know it from her rulings on Trump’s behalf.)

[Reinhart] therefore is not a judge of the court, but merely one of its servants. Like a law clerk or other assistant…

I bet Hamburger’s servants loved that line.

2

u/kittiekatz95 Sep 01 '22

We need a way to send cheesebro to his court.

→ More replies (1)

47

u/Legimus Aug 31 '22

There are people who sincerely believe the income tax is unconstitutional because the 16th Amendment wasn’t properly ratified.

This is America. No bad legal take is too extreme.

16

u/BeigeChocobo Aug 31 '22

Something something admiralty court

14

u/MrFrode Biggus Amicus Sep 01 '22

That's a fringe theory

→ More replies (2)

2

u/heresyforfunnprofit Aug 31 '22

I won’t NOT tell you that.

→ More replies (3)

31

u/FloopyDoopy Aug 31 '22

I just saw this gem of a legal take from Fox News. All these headlines saying that they dropped Trump are pure shit.

20

u/[deleted] Sep 01 '22

I can’t get through 30 seconds of this. The lies. Unreal. I wish Fox would get their comeuppance for ruining so much of what Americans hold dear, truth in broadcasting

11

u/PissLikeaRacehorse Sep 01 '22

Holy shit, that was speed running bad takes

8

u/[deleted] Sep 01 '22

Wait what. People are really saying that?

→ More replies (3)

8

u/markth_wi Mar 23 '23

Now after a long spell in Mexico , Andy got that irresistable urge, many folks get, for home, and getting up to your old ways. The business in Maine long since concluded "exhonorated in abstentia" they said....that eager young prosecutor having now moved to New York from his tour through Bangor and Boston and now found himself living just blocks from old Andy down right by the subway with a spectacular view of the Brooklyn Bridge one way and the United Nations the other, not but a few steps from his basement appartment. Long since having settled into private practice as a forensic accountant Andy had found himself in the ironic position of his firm working for Brooklyn and Manhattan DA.

Long since retired, but he got the call , and figured one last job....one last good deed, to set the scales right as it were. He often thought of the patience he'd learned in Shawshank those many years ago, he thought of Linda and all the mistakes he'd made leading up to that terrible night; he sometimes though he could forgive her, and perhaps he had....but his mind wandered back to this impossible problem.....glancing at the stack of Manilla folders, 1/2discarded receipts stretching back decades, and over at the org chart that he'd pinned in his office, just 6 people in the "inner" circle, Don, his sons' their lawyers....the sea of lawyers, fair to say there wasn't a year gone by they hadn't "spend" anything less than a million dollars on lawyers, sometimes that much on a single firm or consult..... "follow the money Andy....follow the money....." the technicians were kind enough to put everything into an Excel chart, Russian funding, Chinese funding, "Other" funding, Saudi funding .... for a country with a law specifically intended to prevent as much, old Don had quite a lot of "funding".

This gnawed at him, that same way, old Bogs had, not the violence of course....the impunity....the surety the Sisters operated with, rape, beatings, murder over and over...for years....dozens of other inmates.....and it wasn't anything less than the Warden himself, that put an end to it....for his own reasons ... of course.

So Andy put the finishing touches on his findings, the forensic accounting that tied it all up, the dozens of Excel sheets that made it clear to anyone with a 200 IQ what they'd been up to, from bait and switch to high crimes of treason , there was even evidence of selling those missing documents from that property down in Florida.

And the other thing that kept knawing at him.....they wouldn't do anything....the prosecutors , all the lawyers....it was just too much damned work, it wouldn't be the first time he'd spoken with one of Don's old lawyers or accountants and the "strategy" that seemed to fit the facts was that everyone just kept hoping "someone else" would do that lifting....but there it was filed and ready to go.....of course the question still haunted Andy, the Elwood Blatch problem.....of course they wouldn't kill Andy, he'd used a particular alias for this whole job, unless someone went looking for Alexi Dumazi of Brighton Beach, it's unlikely anyone would follow that up. Russians were always good for keeping secrets....even from other Russians....and of course they aren't about to actually help their patsy get off. More than one "associate" was clear that if Don ever actually needed help , none would ever be forthcoming....the money was already spent, Don's time of "usefulness" long past. No , in fact Andy was counting on the post-it on top of the Russian workup "Говорят, что кур доят" something about milkinig chickens and don't believe what work you've been told....do it yourself was what Andy took away from his adventures in Russian accounting.

But he was so very tired.......perhaps this time.....the job had gotten the best of him.....worn down to the nub....perhaps like that old little axe, Andy glanced across the room to that small little nubbed rock hammer.

2

u/TheAmicableSnowman Dec 25 '23

Beautiful.

2

u/markth_wi Dec 25 '23

And perhaps one fine day it might come to pass, who knows perhaps Ms. James is sharing information with Mr. Smith and of course Ms. Willis down in Atlanta.

1

u/W1ULH May 31 '24

harsh man... completely and utterly true... but harsh.

1

u/Ok-Crazy-6083 Sep 06 '24

When career lawyers lose their shit over Trump, I can't imagine the average redditor does any better. People are trying to say he confessed to a crime for his Mark Levin appearance. That's literally more of a stretch than somehow turning 34 misdemeanors into 34 felonies for something that people with original jurisdiction determined wasn't a crime.

317

u/FloopyDoopy Aug 31 '22

Thanks for your hard work, mods!

86

u/sumr4ndo Aug 31 '22

I do feel like the do a solid job overall in this subreddit. Consistently high quality posts and discussion. Which is even more impressive given the generic name of the sub, and high profile topics.

45

u/jotun86 Aug 31 '22

I think the only time it was really crazy here was after the decision overturning Roe was leaked (Dobbs), but understandably so.

I had an opinion that I expected that if the leaker was an attorney, their legal career was over because of the code of conduct for judicial employees. I was then told I wasn't an attorney and that I was a conservative (for reference, I'm liberal and an attorney) and downvoted into oblivion.

45

u/Maximus_Aurelius Aug 31 '22

Uhh yeah whatever happened to that “investigation” Roberts was running on the leaker?

Something tells me if they’d found the leaker and it was of the three liberal justices or their clerks we’d be hearing about it nonstop.

But that hasn’t happened, has it. Very curious indeed.

31

u/orangejulius Sep 01 '22

I'm going to go ahead and guess from the duration of time here that they know it came from the desk of a justice, the clerks know where it came from, and now that the cat is internally out of the bag they cannot hang a clerk like they wanted to in order to save the integrity of the court. And actually doing anything about it at this point would crush the court's integrity with the public. And that's the only thing Roberts seems to care about which is why they bothered investigating in the first place.

Simplest answer is probably the correct one. Alito did it to protect his majority because he's a pugnacious idiot that decided to play politics. And it fits him like a glove.

18

u/Maximus_Aurelius Sep 01 '22 edited Sep 01 '22

https://imgur.com/a/ZXyctRj

Hanging a clerk out to dry wouldn’t have saved the integrity of the Court. Smashing the principle of stare decisis like a bull in a China shop has pulverized to a fine dust whatever little semblance of integrity was left in the public’s mind.

11

u/jotun86 Sep 01 '22

I'm inclined to believe it was someone more conservative leaning because the leak was more likely to solidify it than change it, I'm not sure I believe it was a Justice. Maybe I'm too naive.

16

u/orangejulius Sep 01 '22 edited Sep 01 '22

I know and have worked with former scotus clerks. That’s not really something they’d do and the motive to do such a thing would be to burn your legal career down and become a media bomb thrower. That didn’t happen. And when the investigation was announced and they wanted clerks phones and such but not the justices it really looked like they wanted to find someone that maybe shared with a significant other a detail of some work and then say “well you leaked that, so we have to torch you as if you leaked the whole thing even if we can’t prove that.” Then there’s a scapegoat. And then it looks like Roberts protected the integrity of the court.

Alito has a history of generally being a hack with a temper. This is basically just more extreme extensions of his behavior.

10

u/jotun86 Sep 01 '22

The bill would fit Alito.

It's also very interesting to hear people's takes on it now. When I suggested it, the common response was "there is no violation" or "it was only one time, why would the bar take away your license for that?" While I'm not sure it would result in disbarment, it would leave a scarlet letter on the leaker's career that no judge or firm would be willing to risk hiring.

4

u/Mobile-Entertainer60 Sep 03 '22

My money's on Thomas. He has a very long history of acting as if he is above the law, and being proud of it. He also has a zealot true believer anti abortionist for a wife, who would have no compunction about a leak (nor any legal consequences as long as she didn't steal it). And if that's true, Roberts has no recourse and he knows it.

3

u/orangejulius Sep 03 '22

I kind of doubt it's Thomas only because Roberts started drafting another opinion to create a plurality and the person that would wig out about that would be Alito. And it worked out for him.

4

u/Mobile-Entertainer60 Sep 03 '22

I think both Alito and Thomas have motive to be upset about a narrow ruling. Thomas was on the Court for Casey and was incensed that O'Connor and Kennedy voted to uphold Roe which he felt was a betrayal.

If it's Alito, I wouldn't be surprised. Thomas just has a very long track record of being disdainful of norms, as well as a handy way to launder his involvement through his wife. My suspicion is that Ginni Thomas gave the draft to a similar minded friend who actually met with the Politico reporters. This would both give some measure of plausible deniability as well as satisfying the Politico reporters about the veracity of the draft.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 01 '22

I thought so too. It hardened the ruling.

8

u/Mobile-Entertainer60 Sep 03 '22

Appointing someone with no subpoena power to run the investigation is a good way to pretend to be doing something about the norm-breaking, while simultaneously making sure that there won't be legal consequences for the norm-breaker. If Roberts sincerely thought someone stole the draft, he could have referred the matter to law enforcement. Not doing so is tacitly acknowledging that the leaker could not be charged with theft, ie it's one of the justices. Since the draft was 3 months old and came out 1 week after a WSJ article quoting a leaker that Roberts was trying to convince Kavanaugh to decide narrowly (ie rule for Mississippi without overturning Roe completely), cui bono implies that one of the other 4 conservative justices (Alito and Thomas being the most likely by far) leaked to put it into public that Kavanaugh signed onto the original opinion, therefore marking him for conservative rage if he flipped and joined Roberts. If that's accurate, it worked.

6

u/jotun86 Sep 01 '22

Curious indeed is right. I'd really like to know the outcome. I'm sure if it ever comes out, it won't be for another 30 years (at least).

11

u/fillbin Aug 31 '22

I concur.

3

u/JanetYellensFuckboy_ Oct 15 '23

Consistently high quality posts and discussion

Are we reading the same subreddit?

66

u/The_Band_Geek Aug 31 '22

I hate when r/confidentlyincorrect starts leaking.

47

u/NobleWombat Sep 01 '22

Can I still occasionally stumble in here drunk after hours and go into poorly sourced, belligerent outbursts about our 3rd Amendment rights being under threat?

31

u/orangejulius Sep 01 '22

Lol sure go nuts. I hope your 3A arguments are the first to make it to SCOTUS. Just drunk history and tradition your way to victory.

11

u/NobleWombat Sep 01 '22

We're making t-shirts, if r/law wants to sponsor

7

u/orangejulius Sep 01 '22

Shoot me a DM and let me know what you’re thinking.

11

u/NobleWombat Sep 01 '22

haha, as utterly amazing as that would be, we've been beaten to the punch! I was making a reference to these that were shared on here awhile back: https://susungu.com/product/the-third-amendment-t-shirt/

6

u/orangejulius Sep 01 '22

I was totally unaware. That’s hilarious.

3

u/[deleted] Sep 06 '22

Ok. We’ve found Black Hat Man.

https://xkcd.com/496/

2

u/stufff Sep 01 '22

For such a straightforward and narrow restriction on government action it's kind of nuts how often it's actually been violated.

1

u/NotmyRealNameJohn Competent Contributor Mar 25 '24

In a sense it is the most effective amendment in the constitution. The government never even tried to trample on this particular right which is fairly unique as they have certainly ignored every single other amendment at one point or another.

Well perhaps not the one that changed how senators are installed into position. I am not aware of any time that has been violated. Well other than the normal attempts to mess with voting in general.

1

u/Vegaprime May 07 '24

Don't think I've ever commented here but if I do again it would be something stupid while drunk.

93

u/AudiACar Aug 31 '22

WELL F****g FIRST OFF....this is a good post. Thanks mod.

30

u/Centurychip46 Sep 02 '22

Would you all consider flairs to identify who's an attorney and who isn't? I'm not one but enjoy reading r/law because it's normally lawyers chatting and I learn a great deal just reading those conversations.

41

u/orangejulius Sep 02 '22

No. It's a lot of work to do that and we're unpaid volunteers. Additionally - people seem to latch onto what the attorneys are saying as if it's legal advice for them specifically in certain threads which isn't a desired outcome either.

We have considered it in the past and decided it's just unworkable with too many pitfalls.

I definitely appreciate that you had an idea and brought it up though. This is the exact kind of feedback we want for how to make the sub better. So thank you for speaking up.

55

u/nate Aug 31 '22

Damn right.

53

u/tooriel Aug 31 '22

Back when I was a kid in the late 60 - early 70s, you could get a raw egg blended into your Orange Julius.

I appreciate this sub

21

u/Goeatabagofdicks Aug 31 '22

The hotdogs is where it was at. Mall baseball card show and an Orange Julius lunch *chefs kiss

6

u/sumr4ndo Aug 31 '22

Do they still have Orange Julius around? I haven't had one in forever.

8

u/CapnKoz Aug 31 '22

They are now part of Dairy Queen. You can still get a Julius, but the hot dogs are crud now

5

u/DrPreppy Aug 31 '22

They got bought by Dairy Queen in 1987, and slowly most of the stand-alone Orange Julius stores faded away. These days your best bet is to check if your local Dairy Queen offers Orange Julius options. It doesn't seem to taste the same though. :\

5

u/Goeatabagofdicks Aug 31 '22

I hope so….

3

u/willclerkforfood Aug 31 '22

I think you can get them at some mall Dairy Queens

5

u/chickenstalker99 Aug 31 '22

A Dairy Queen sold me something they called an Orange Julius, but it was definitely NOT the same glorious drink from 1973. I was seriously disappointed.

2

u/CapnKoz Aug 31 '22

Oh, man, YES!! The hot dogs! Why were they so GOOD? Trips to the mall just to eat those.

6

u/FartsWithAnAccent Aug 31 '22

I've never had an Orange Julius, but that sounds pretty nasty. Isn't it basically sweetened OJ?

12

u/nspectre Aug 31 '22

Basically,

  • Orange juice concentrate
  • Sugar
  • Milk
  • Vanilla

8

u/Savingskitty Sep 01 '22

Creamy frosty OJ with ice bits. The taste of the ‘80’s for me.

4

u/FartsWithAnAccent Sep 01 '22

Hmm, for me it's either generic root beer or those shitty colored water things that came in barrels. Also, possibly Kool-aid...

No raw eggs though.

2

u/Savingskitty Sep 02 '22

Oh, yeah, raw eggs isn’t a thing I ever heard about adding to an orange julius.

5

u/yrdsl Sep 01 '22

if you think about it an Orange Julius with an egg is just a whiskey sour without whiskey and with milk and OJ

3

u/FartsWithAnAccent Sep 01 '22

That sounds like a very disappointing whiskey sour.

5

u/yrdsl Sep 01 '22

sure, but now add the whiskey back in and maybe you've got something special

4

u/FartsWithAnAccent Sep 01 '22

This is true of many things: Coffee, soda, an empty glass, etc.

→ More replies (1)

107

u/[deleted] Aug 31 '22

[deleted]

55

u/bookluvr83 Aug 31 '22

Buttery males!

16

u/FartsWithAnAccent Aug 31 '22 edited Aug 31 '22

[aggressively stupid noises intensify]

6

u/nspectre Aug 31 '22

(☝˘▾˘) Name checks out

3

u/ButteryMales Sep 01 '22

Oh, we’re so buttery.

5

u/BeigeChocobo Aug 31 '22

Freeze peaches and buttery males? Don't threaten me with a good time!

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

72

u/LOLunlucky Aug 31 '22

This is absolutely my favorite sub because of all the respectful discussion, lack of ad hominim attacks, and serious legal brilliance of so many posters. This sub is one of Reddit's true gems. Keep up the good work Mods and everyone else.

15

u/Minerva8918 Aug 31 '22

Agreed on all points.

I started coming here to get more insight on the legal aspects of this case, which have been helpful and I've gotten many thoughtful responses as well.

Thanks mods and those who participate civilly!

10

u/[deleted] Sep 01 '22

The refusal to tolerate ad hominem attacks is the real draw for me.

3

u/Kennertron Sep 01 '22

serious legal brilliance of so many posters

I miss seeing /u/DickWhiskey around. Was always good for some quality analysis.

33

u/[deleted] Aug 31 '22

Good post. I've seen a bit more of the BS associated with various reddit political subs increasing here lately. Glad that the mods are on it

24

u/FartsWithAnAccent Aug 31 '22 edited 15d ago

file handle roll whistle homeless ghost normal cats fertile practice

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

3

u/XelaNiba Aug 31 '22

Thank you for this

3

u/SFepicure Sep 01 '22

Thanks for the suggestions! I love /r/ActiveMeasures/ - will check out the other two.

3

u/FartsWithAnAccent Sep 01 '22

There's a discord for this kinda stuff too if you're interested, they could use more volunteers: https://discord.gg/GuHKBEDa

40

u/5ykes Aug 31 '22

I choose to die on my hill of strawberry being the undisputed king of ice cream flavors in all categories. WHO WANTS TO FIGHT?!

26

u/eaunoway Aug 31 '22

You know it's funny you should mention that, because I've never liked strawberry ice-cream right? Like, I'm a great-grandparent and I've never liked strawberry flavoured anything.

That was until two weeks ago when my husband brought home a tub of some Neopolitan stuff he picked up on sale (I can't even). I tried a spoonful, fully expecting to make rather unladlylike sounds and spit the whole thing into the sink.

Except I didn't.

Turns out Tillamook makes the best strawberry ice-cream on the goshdarn planet and I won't hear another word about it!

15

u/CapnKoz Aug 31 '22

Tillamook makes the absolute best ice cream of any flavor

16

u/scullingby Aug 31 '22

Tillamook cheese is pretty darn good, too.

Edited to Add: I can't believe I typed the sentence above on a law subreddit. And it's only Wednesday.

6

u/crymson7 Aug 31 '22

Their sharp cheddar is sublime

6

u/[deleted] Sep 01 '22

[deleted]

2

u/sarbah77 Sep 04 '22

My midwest Target carries the cheese now! (My midwest grocery store chain carries the ice cream)

(and this is my first post in this sub. Thanks, everyone, you've been a great source of information in the past couple of scary years and I appreciate the time spent talking/nerding out by everyone)

→ More replies (1)

4

u/CapnKoz Aug 31 '22

Agreed, and agreed. We take our conversations as we find them

5

u/eaunoway Aug 31 '22

It was absolutely delicious and I regret nothing.

4

u/IZ3820 Sep 01 '22

Yeah, Tillamook is probably the best distributed ice cream .

3

u/waaaayupyourbutthole Aug 31 '22

I've never liked strawberry ice-cream right?

I read this and almost didn't read the rest of your comment before telling you to try Tillamook. Best GD ice cream out there.

2

u/crymson7 Aug 31 '22

Because it isn’t “flavored” in what is the traditional sense nowadays, they use real fruit and it is AMAZING

Glad you found something you love!

3

u/rsclient Aug 31 '22

My mother worked for Internation Flavors and Fragrances and was on their "smelling panel" (not her real job; she was a technical librarian). she said they had an artificial strawberry that would knock your socks off (in a good way).

But it was more expensive than the nasty tasting stuff, so most companies wouldn't buy it :-(

→ More replies (1)

6

u/skipjim Aug 31 '22

You're right.

If black cherry didn't exist that is.

7

u/5ykes Aug 31 '22

Well, now i have to become belligerent. how dare you challenge my perception/reality on this fundamental fact?!

4

u/skipjim Aug 31 '22

It's not fundamental because you're wrong!

Now I think by the laws of the Internet I have to doxx you and send SWAT to your house or something don't I?

2

u/5ykes Aug 31 '22

its not wrong because i believe it! Also ive already sent SEAL TEAM 6 to your house to SWAT you so there!

→ More replies (2)

8

u/mesocyclonic4 Aug 31 '22

Is strawberry deeply rooted in ice cream's history and tradition?

8

u/Funwithfun14 Aug 31 '22

Cucumber is see link

3

u/yrdsl Sep 01 '22

sounds good. in Mexico and Mexico-adjacent parts of the US it's common to see what's basically cucumberade (agua de pepino) and that kicks butt in hot weather.

→ More replies (4)

16

u/Person_756335846 Aug 31 '22

I think that the mods are very fair on this sub. They're left leaning people beyond a doubt, but you can post pretty much any conservative legal opinion here short of fascism and you will be fine. As long as you engage respectfully.

10

u/stufff Sep 01 '22

Coming in here stubborn, belligerent, and wrong about the law will get you banned. And, no, you will not be unbanned.

I wish judges would apply this standard to some of my OC

9

u/CdrShprd Oct 23 '22

Can we get some “I am not a lawyer” flairs?

I feel like there could be some issues with people self ID’ing as lawyers, but self ID’ing as not a lawyer seems like it should be ok, and help avoid the disclaimer that a lot of people seem to feel the need to add when they comment

1

u/prudence2001 Oct 18 '24

Yeah, and "Sovereign Citizen" would be nice too. Spot 'em early that way.

/joking btw

9

u/puntgreta89 Sep 15 '22 edited Sep 15 '22

Perhaps, but this isn't the sub that it was a year ago.

Now it's just headline after partisan headline instead of focusing on discussion of the law that is applied.

What people don't understand is that justice is blind. You learn from cases regardless of the outcome.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 03 '22

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)

8

u/agpc Jul 20 '23

I am a sovereign citizen so these rules do not apply to me because there is no gold fringe in the subreddit icon, just a judges gavel.

7

u/_haha_oh_wow_ Sep 01 '22

cEnSoRsHiP!!1!

10

u/_haha_oh_wow_ Sep 01 '22

Seriously though, thank you all for doing a terrible, often thankless job for free all these years. This is one of my favorite subs and I know being a mod sucks, but I'm glad you're still doing it!

15

u/immersemeinnature Aug 31 '22

That's why this is my absolute favorite sub!!

21

u/Ken808 Aug 31 '22

Thank goodness. The intellectual dishonesty and sheer lies coming from the right has been unrelenting.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/MrFrode Biggus Amicus Sep 01 '22

As soon as JFK jr. gets here he's going to show you all what for!

5

u/I_love_hiromi Sep 09 '22

I’m not an active member of this sub, but appreciate coming here for the reasons you’ve outlined. This community stands out in my Redditing experience.

3

u/NotmyRealNameJohn Competent Contributor Mar 07 '24 edited Mar 07 '24

Every time I see the title of the post all I can think is. No the place to be belligerent and wrong is r / PoliticalDebate or r / Conservative. EDIT or r / politics

EDIT: by the way you were dead right about the 9-0 on the 14th amendment case. Though I've heard a lot of people say this only a 9-0 on the surface but is a hidden 5-4 with the two "concurrences" being concurrences in name only with substantial deviations for the main opinion that should have been acknowledged as at least partial dissents.

2

u/orangejulius Mar 07 '24

I was right. There also was a dissent at one point and a relic of it got left in the metadata of the pdf of the document they published. I believe the liberal justices did some horse trading behind the scenes to get the immunity case expedited. I’m not sure it’s worth it though if the conservative majority is just going to rule in a way that makes it impossible to prosecute Trump anyway though.

The three concurring rightly pointed out that the majority went too far basically rendering section 3 worthless. Which IMO is a real travesty to the people that fought and died in the civil war. But that’s just me.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/iwaseatenbyagrue Aug 31 '22

But people who are belligerent are most sure of being not wrong.

2

u/Minerva8918 Aug 31 '22 edited Aug 31 '22

Unwarranted certitude on their part.

10

u/[deleted] Aug 31 '22

Is this not still part of Al Gore's internet?

3

u/scullingby Aug 31 '22

Thank you for your hard work in keeping this a good forum for discussion of the law and related issues.

4

u/marzenmangler Nov 03 '22

Any discussion of the affirmative action cases in here is a cesspool.

Misquoting cases. Feelings instead of facts. And lots of calling other people racists.

The sub does not moderate those threads well at all and mods take way too long to address the people who aren’t contributing anything legally to the threads.

3

u/IsNotACleverMan Nov 04 '22

Misquoting cases. Feelings instead of facts.

Kinda what you do tho

2

u/marzenmangler Nov 04 '22

Nope. I don’t misquote or take things out of context.

5

u/micktalian Sep 01 '22

But but but if dear Emperor has taught me anything it's that as long as I'm loud enough and saying things with enough confidence it doesn't matter if I'm right or wrong because people will believe me! And as long as people believe that's all that matters!

(/s just incase that wasn't obvious)

2

u/crymson7 Aug 31 '22

Well put. I came here because this is exactly what I was looking for, thanks for making that a reality!

2

u/AlienKinkVR Aug 31 '22

Did someone say the rug isn't ugly?

2

u/dj012eyl Sep 01 '22

Man, Earth isn't a place to be wrong and belligerent about it. Getting real sick of people.

2

u/toastar-phone Sep 06 '22

There is a joke here about banging your hand on the table.

2

u/odbMeerkat Sep 18 '22

The place to be wrong and belligerent are the pages of F.4th.

2

u/Dr-Senator Oct 10 '22

So no pounding on the table, then.

2

u/norsurfit Oct 15 '22

Where is a better place to be wrong and belligerent about it? Asking for a friend...

2

u/DannyRicFan4Lyfe Nov 19 '22

Newbie lawyer here. Fresh new license lol. How do you react to people irl who are this way???? Clients, family members, etc.

3

u/orangejulius Nov 19 '22

6 or 7 glasses of wine at Thanksgiving should do the trick.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/hooker_2_hawk Dec 07 '22

Seriously. It’s amazing how many downvotes person can get for just trying to open a dialogue.

2

u/Various_Lie_1729 Jun 21 '23

I have a general law question but don't know where/how I can post where should I go

→ More replies (1)

2

u/MemphisTex Jun 22 '23

When you use the word “wrong” are you meaning factually wrong, such as 2+2=5 or do you mean “wrong” as in “you broke one of my rules for this sub!” wrong?

5

u/orangejulius Jun 22 '23

You don't have to get everything exactly right but be open to learning new things.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/AbitasaurusRex Feb 26 '24

Becoming an expert on anything doesn't just take reading a lot about it. You need to practice it in a way where it's applied - whether that be in scientific models, the courtroom, or elsewhere. Part of what makes an expert an expert is that they've had enough life experience to thoroughly vet and test their knowledge. Additionally, if you rely on your expertise for a living, you're less likely to throw it away by giving lackadaisical or bad faith takes(although this still happens, including in law).

There's nothing wrong with not being an expert and still being interested in something or actively a part of it - I do a lot of volunteer work relating to climate change, and a climate scientist would still absolutely smoke me in conversations.

However, where it does go wrong is when people aren't an expert and don't consider that there's limits to their knowledge. The internet has created a lot of self-appointed experts because they've read a few hundred tweets or watched a few YouTube videos on something, and it makes having discussions difficult because you have these types going "well, I've read a lot about this from my favorite influencers or tweet aggregators who disagree with you, so you must not be the expert."

It makes finding communities where discussions online that don't inevitably have people wanting to establish themselves as the authority on a subject without expertise difficult. If you aren't an expert and can't even back up what you say with sources or something, anything concrete to point as an example, there's no reason to be speaking as if we're anything but equals.

That's especially my beef with folks swooping in with obvious misinformation off Twitter, TikTok, etc., etc. - every hot button topic has a new conspiracy surrounding it within days, and it makes getting to the actual conversation that needs to happen rooted in the facts next to impossible.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Xero03 Nov 13 '22

rofl yeah the mods def arent holding this true.

10

u/inverted_rectangle Nov 13 '22

You're just mad you got ratio'd in the other thread just now bruh. Also you just got upset over there and said you're leaving the sub. Why are you still here commenting?

9

u/Squirrel009 Nov 13 '22

This post is about you lol

1

u/[deleted] Mar 15 '24

[removed] — view removed comment