rlheppner.bsky.social
Law Prof at Duquesne Kline Law (Civ Pro, Fed Courts) • Former Appellate Attorney • English PhD (Modernism) • Overeducated, overtired, underwhelmed. Posts too infrequently to have a brand. he/him
2,864 posts
2,069 followers
1,343 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
It depends how you define “cases” and “court.” Most disputes are reaolved before going to court (i.e., don’t result in litigation). Most cases are resolved before trial. But, yeah, trials are not just theater.
comment in response to
post
I’m hopeful about this upcoming exhibit in Pittsburgh.
comment in response to
post
And you have to pay a ton to get in!
comment in response to
post
🙄 frickin’ “auto”-correct…
comment in response to
post
No, you’re right. Yaris are not supposed to be appealable. And yet, these days…
comment in response to
post
To the extent the second (“shall be issued through the governors”) sentence requires governors to issue the orders, it seems like there’s no role for the President at all after calling up the NG under the first sentence.
comment in response to
post
“We do not address the separate issue of whether this would constitute unconstitutional commandeering [if it were done by a Democratic president].”
comment in response to
post
I mean, it’s not like Newsom was even the conduit.
comment in response to
post
Stark numbers. And those are *percentages* of the (increased) total arrests, meaning that it’s not just that ICE is arresting more people and thus also more non-criminals.
comment in response to
post
And the current administration’s record in court.
comment in response to
post
Does that mean they only have to do it in 1% of districts / polling places to make a difference? (Probably not. But it does seem like something less than the total swarming of voting places you describe would sill be sufficient to sway an election.)
comment in response to
post
No, he does not admit to being undocumented. And I'd be surprised if he currently is.
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
Isn’t the concern it just federal LE but the National Guard and even the military?
comment in response to
post
Gonna need a catchy title.
comment in response to
post
Except…
comment in response to
post
I don't get why the founding-era Banks don't count as history and tradition for independent agencies writ large. There are clearly many areas where a degree of independence is desirable. The "monetary policy" distinction seems like a retcon, drawing the line where they would like it to be.
comment in response to
post
Thanks. That’s really helpful information. It can be hard, from the outside, to understand the scale we’re discussing. But that really helps.
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
Really useful perspective. I’m curious: What (roughly) is the break-even level for a book from a UP like yours, where it’s not being subsidized by other sales? Would a few seminars a year buying the book be enough?
comment in response to
post
Part of the overall, deeply disappointing the-nerds-became-assholes-as-soon-as-they-got-power phenomenon.
comment in response to
post
How is Zotero at legal case citations? Or are you using JurisM?
comment in response to
post
And, on the other hand, it seems like the second task (verifying the presidential validity of a legal concept) is the much more mechanistic task where automation might actually be helpful.
comment in response to
post
The idea that AI should do the more creative, conceptual exploration and analogizing is just maddening. That’s exactly what AI can’t do. It can throw out some stuff that looks like a cross-context analogy, but that doesn’t mean it is.
comment in response to
post
This seems like something @kottke.org would feature.
comment in response to
post
📌
comment in response to
post
LOL - no filter at all, just blurring the quiet part out loud.
comment in response to
post
That’s your example of “necessities?”
comment in response to
post
Just copy that law firm motion to amend to add basically every federal agency.
comment in response to
post
I mean, it’s also supposed to happen BEFORE the removal, so…
comment in response to
post
Even if 24 hours would’ve been sufficient in the first place, I’m not sure “narrow tailoring” means the remedy for violating due process is just an order to do that minimum now.