Supreme Court caselaw suggests that this is almost certainly illegal.
ICE and MPD have set up a checkpoint at 17 and Benning NE, by the Ross.
August 18, 2025 at 11:41 PM
Supreme Court caselaw suggests that this is almost certainly illegal.
lmao, love reading First Amendment caselaw
September 23, 2026 at 5:25 PM
lmao, love reading First Amendment caselaw
This is also my solution to "AI hallucinates caselaw," a few partners find themselves on the out with the SRA and I suspect it becomes solvable.
September 24, 2026 at 4:21 PM
This is also my solution to "AI hallucinates caselaw," a few partners find themselves on the out with the SRA and I suspect it becomes solvable.
They didn’t even include Massieu, the ONE case which has produced caselaw about the law? Weird.
UPDATE: After Judge Farbiarz ordered the govt to provide a complete list of instances in which the SecState invoked the foreign policy provision at issue in the Khalil case, the govt gave 3 examples in a letter this morning (2 of them by Sec Rubio himself) with another update to come around 5pm
May 9, 2025 at 9:02 PM
They didn’t even include Massieu, the ONE case which has produced caselaw about the law? Weird.
If I lied about caselaw the way the government lies about caselaw, I would absolutely get chewed out by the judge.
July 8, 2025 at 4:30 PM
If I lied about caselaw the way the government lies about caselaw, I would absolutely get chewed out by the judge.
gork cooking up brand new enrons with its combined caselaw/corpfin model
May 2, 2026 at 1:20 AM
gork cooking up brand new enrons with its combined caselaw/corpfin model
Another fake caselaw case, this time in US. Use of AI tool admitted.
And another irked judge imposing sanctions.
And another irked judge imposing sanctions.
May 13, 2025 at 7:36 PM
Another fake caselaw case, this time in US. Use of AI tool admitted.
And another irked judge imposing sanctions.
And another irked judge imposing sanctions.
"I can't agree with that here."
=
"I have no evidence, caselaw or cogent counter-argument, but I am not allowed to agree with that."
=
"I have no evidence, caselaw or cogent counter-argument, but I am not allowed to agree with that."
February 18, 2025 at 7:17 PM
"I can't agree with that here."
=
"I have no evidence, caselaw or cogent counter-argument, but I am not allowed to agree with that."
=
"I have no evidence, caselaw or cogent counter-argument, but I am not allowed to agree with that."
My post is now updated with some caselaw and an Wisconsin AG opinion. electionlawblog.org?p=149196
March 28, 2025 at 4:11 PM
My post is now updated with some caselaw and an Wisconsin AG opinion. electionlawblog.org?p=149196
maaaaan: Federal court fines California lawyer for citing nonexistent caselaw hallucinated by AI www.fd.org/news/court-s...
January 31, 2025 at 6:50 PM
maaaaan: Federal court fines California lawyer for citing nonexistent caselaw hallucinated by AI www.fd.org/news/court-s...
Boasberg is now citing caselaw saying that the government is required to actually provide a clear reason before refusing to provide him classified or national security information.
He asks if the DOJ can provide in writing tomorrow by noon what their position is communicating the info to him.
He asks if the DOJ can provide in writing tomorrow by noon what their position is communicating the info to him.
March 17, 2025 at 9:13 PM
Boasberg is now citing caselaw saying that the government is required to actually provide a clear reason before refusing to provide him classified or national security information.
He asks if the DOJ can provide in writing tomorrow by noon what their position is communicating the info to him.
He asks if the DOJ can provide in writing tomorrow by noon what their position is communicating the info to him.
Do you not cite caselaw in your videos
August 27, 2026 at 1:50 AM
Do you not cite caselaw in your videos
You don't believe in Bigfoot litigation?
An Incomplete Primer of Caselaw Appertaining To Bigfoot, AKA Sasquatch, LNU
With Comments On Anticipated Litigation And Mistaken Identification
www.popehat.com
February 14, 2024 at 6:49 PM
You don't believe in Bigfoot litigation?
Some asked if there was caselaw on this point. Tis!
December 12, 2025 at 7:01 PM
Some asked if there was caselaw on this point. Tis!
That post-Civil War caselaw doesn’t count. We know why.
June 29, 2026 at 2:25 PM
That post-Civil War caselaw doesn’t count. We know why.
We are about to get an extensive new set of caselaw about the 10th Amendment. Current law provides that the federal government may not use funding decisions to "coerce" states to change their behavior.
ABC White House correspondent just released ANOTHER anti-trans EO expected that we did not cover in our piece this morning:
A federal ban on funding to programs that acknowledge and affirm transgender people.
A federal ban on funding to programs that acknowledge and affirm transgender people.
January 20, 2025 at 6:49 PM
We are about to get an extensive new set of caselaw about the 10th Amendment. Current law provides that the federal government may not use funding decisions to "coerce" states to change their behavior.
I want to emphasize this: THEY DO NOT CITE ANY CASELAW FOR THESE ARGUMENTS. The only reason they wouldn't do that is because THERE IS NO CASELAW. Courts do not force legislators to vote on things. There is no basis in the Texas Constitution for the Texas Supreme Court to ORDER legislators around.
August 5, 2025 at 11:26 PM
I want to emphasize this: THEY DO NOT CITE ANY CASELAW FOR THESE ARGUMENTS. The only reason they wouldn't do that is because THERE IS NO CASELAW. Courts do not force legislators to vote on things. There is no basis in the Texas Constitution for the Texas Supreme Court to ORDER legislators around.
A children's book about Caselaw and his brother Coleslaw
December 9, 2024 at 2:24 PM
A children's book about Caselaw and his brother Coleslaw
/4 That sounds a bit contrived but caselaw establishes that you’ve got to show that the statement is literally false. Which is a problem.
But the problem of McCabe being seen by DoJ as a liar, only to become the star witness, is a bigger one.
But the problem of McCabe being seen by DoJ as a liar, only to become the star witness, is a bigger one.
September 26, 2025 at 1:22 AM
/4 That sounds a bit contrived but caselaw establishes that you’ve got to show that the statement is literally false. Which is a problem.
But the problem of McCabe being seen by DoJ as a liar, only to become the star witness, is a bigger one.
But the problem of McCabe being seen by DoJ as a liar, only to become the star witness, is a bigger one.
The plaintiffs argue that their kids' mere exposure to these materials burdens their religious exercise. Under current caselaw, mere exposure does not burden a person's First Amendment rights, and that public schools cannot be required to tailor curricula to individual religious preferences.
April 22, 2025 at 1:57 PM
The plaintiffs argue that their kids' mere exposure to these materials burdens their religious exercise. Under current caselaw, mere exposure does not burden a person's First Amendment rights, and that public schools cannot be required to tailor curricula to individual religious preferences.
July 4, 2025 at 4:21 PM
Matt Stone and Trey Parker-creators of South Park-just got a $1.5 billion streaming deal from Paramount
This is their season premiere
The best part?
Satire is not actionable under defamation caselaw
But Trump will probably try to interfere with the merger between Paramount and Skydance instead
This is their season premiere
The best part?
Satire is not actionable under defamation caselaw
But Trump will probably try to interfere with the merger between Paramount and Skydance instead
July 24, 2025 at 11:56 AM
Matt Stone and Trey Parker-creators of South Park-just got a $1.5 billion streaming deal from Paramount
This is their season premiere
The best part?
Satire is not actionable under defamation caselaw
But Trump will probably try to interfere with the merger between Paramount and Skydance instead
This is their season premiere
The best part?
Satire is not actionable under defamation caselaw
But Trump will probably try to interfere with the merger between Paramount and Skydance instead
On the second point, the United States *cannot* terminate permanent legal status (a green card) without going through a legal process first. And while the results of the initial stages of that process may be a foregone conclusion under caselaw, that makes Rubio’s claim false.
April 4, 2026 at 5:36 PM
On the second point, the United States *cannot* terminate permanent legal status (a green card) without going through a legal process first. And while the results of the initial stages of that process may be a foregone conclusion under caselaw, that makes Rubio’s claim false.
A dark sign of the times when you’re reading caselaw on the prosecution of pirates in relation to the actions of your own government.
September 14, 2025 at 10:30 PM
A dark sign of the times when you’re reading caselaw on the prosecution of pirates in relation to the actions of your own government.
For those interested, the case has social benefit in that it establishes in caselaw how 2SLGBTQ+ hate speech can meet the bar for both defamation and harassment. The caselaw is thin in this regard, especially in relation to social media.
July 22, 2025 at 1:11 AM
For those interested, the case has social benefit in that it establishes in caselaw how 2SLGBTQ+ hate speech can meet the bar for both defamation and harassment. The caselaw is thin in this regard, especially in relation to social media.