There’s a portrait up in Yale Law that I walk by and tell anyone I happen to be with, “she didn’t do her part of the fedcourts outline”

Such a delight to work with @stanlrev.bsky.social on this—come for the poaching poem, stay for the property arguments.

First time I’ve been tempted to sign up for polymarket. What a parlay

Friends, I had emailed a bunch of random things to the CoPilot support division of our IT department

My favorite CoPilot story is when CoPilot told me it could help me solve a problem if I forwarded a bunch of emails to it at CoPilot@harvard.edu. So I did, then it told me it couldn’t see them. On further inquiry, it confessed it did not have an email address.

When did you know your research idea was in trouble

Thanks Jake! The silver lining of learning about the 2nd amendment against my will = all the great people doing work over that way

ICQ, LiveJournal, lots of AIM away messages in these symbols ~*~~*~ — this is exactly what the Brandeis Chair was meant to sustain

Sorry just caught me after my 40000th “AI in Academia is Satan” read. Also I don’t mean to pour salt but like my Geocities site in 2000 was in many web rings, I been out here on tech making a fool of myself a while

E.g., I had an agent import 28 articles into Zotero for me yesterday, then ran code that exported those from Zotero into a folder that I can read on my tablet? Like, would’ve taken hours

Yeah, I think the more time you spend with these things the more you realize how they can be boosters that fit into your existing ways of doing things (not at all for the prose generation).

Montana’s Housing Crisis Fix Survives Constitutional Challenge Homeowners favoring single-family residences sued to block legislation meant to increase housing supply and bring down home prices.

The Montana Supreme Court just upheld laws meant to address the state’s housing crisis, after homeowners sued to block the legislation. @hls.harvard.edu's @maureenebrady.com wrote about the case.

❤️ this

lol did not see this beforehand

Was this made specifically for me? Can the rest of you see this or is this the end

Opus 4 is going to start a substack

Where do I pick up

One of my favorite early 20th century cases attempts to ban a billboard bc “criminals hide behind them.” Same vibe

Hotel NIMBY lady is back, this time with facts—from a study of TripAdvisor reviews in Atlanta and New Orleans, superb comps for my MA suburb. Up next, I’ll be studying the rise of vampire-human relationships using Goodreads

Meteor hitting earth; plague; Molly Brady; Eiffel Tower fell

I’d really like to meet the legend responsible for putting together the Harvard Gazette subject lines every morning

(I fear that point = forever but bless)

The Path Not Taken in Federal Takings Law Debates from 19th century state conventions explain why some constitutions allow takings for "private use."

NEW: Kelo may be settled, but courts continue to grapple w/ limits on eminent domain. Drawing on debates from 19th century state conventions, @maureenebrady.com shows how necessity historically structured private-use takings, offering a framework for thinking about public use today & going forward.

More Historical Evidence Showing that the Public Use Clause of the Fifth Amendment Does Not Allow Takings that Transfer Property to Private Parties NA The Supreme Court's controversial 5-4 ruling in Kelo v. City of New London (2005), held that private "economic development" is…

And thanks to @ilyasomin.bsky.social for this write-up over at @reason.com! reason.com/volokh/2026/...

The Path Not Taken in Federal Takings Law Debates from 19th century state conventions explain why some constitutions allow takings for "private use."

Caught in the snowday/first day of teaching backlog:

Thanks to @statecourtreport.org at @brennancenter.org for this chance to discuss some of my research on the "private-use" takings provisions in state constitutions, statecourtreport.org/our-work/ana...;

First default wins. (As I point out it’s not even clear at what points in history that’s been a majority default rule, and it’s a bare majority today…)

Why 1877? No. There was an earlier NC law that requiring posting to ban hunters on your land at the courthouse AND 2 other places where public notice was ordinarily given. But I think the 1st “allowed-unless-posted-on-land” is Ohio. (I should dig further into it but someone was rushing to finish…)

The default, btw, seems to date to 1877 🤪

My 4yo fell and split his head open at school. He asked for a popsicle, and the principal said “but your bump’s on the back of your head, popsicles are for bumps in your mouth.” He told her, “but my bones go all the way to the front.”

He enjoyed the popsicle and I’m very worried about my future

I think: (1) the Supreme Court's own decisions HAVE done this for 1st Am rights, e.g., no right to protest even on property held open to the public (Hudgens); and (2) Martin v. City of Struthers will get new life, which is harder but I think distinguishable because there was no opt-out.