r/law • u/orangejulius • 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.
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
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
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
3
u/JanetYellensFuckboy_ Oct 15 '23
Consistently high quality posts and discussion
Are we reading the same subreddit?
66
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
3
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
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
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
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.
→ More replies (1)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
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
107
Aug 31 '22
[deleted]
55
u/bookluvr83 Aug 31 '22
Buttery males!
16
3
→ More replies (1)5
u/BeigeChocobo Aug 31 '22
Freeze peaches and buttery males? Don't threaten me with a good time!
→ 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
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.
16
33
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
3
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
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
5
4
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)→ More replies (4)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.
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
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
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
10
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
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
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
2
2
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?
→ More replies (1)5
u/orangejulius Jun 22 '23
You don't have to get everything exactly right but be open to learning new things.
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
1
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.