So I won't weigh in on the legal ethics of it, but I can say this: New York has the strongest press shield law in the Nation, and there is zero chance that disciplinary authorities, even if they were so inclined, would be able to discover Liptak's and Cantor's sources.
None.
Interesting, but not very persuasive. The comment to rule 8.4 explains that "Offenses involving violence, dishonesty, breach of trust, or serious interference with the administration of justice are in that category."
Writing a news article about leaked memos does not sound like any of those things.
second base umpire wanted nothing to do with no goose
Counterpoint: um, no? That's not how any of this works?
This is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read (w alt text)
Say, law students, to whom does a lawyer owe a duty of confidentiality?
Once again need to remind everyone that the supposedly crime-infested hellhole of New York is one of the safest cities in the country in no small part because most people in the central area don’t drive. America has a much bigger car problem than a violent crime problem.
$1,700 is roughly the FIT burden of a household of three filing joint making 65k, to put that into tax perspective.
At least one checked bag, under X lbs, should be free, one personal item should be free, and any carryon should cost you!) 2/2
The bag each that we let family members take is always smaller than any roller bag that gets stuffed overhead.
We don't check, partly as a price thing and partly because we want to get out of the airport faster. (Also, charging for checked baggage and give free carryons is so stupid. 1/
Ah, that's helpful. Thanks!
When we travel, each person gets one bag, one of those bags that can transform into a backpack.
My wife meticulously plans so that, if it's a long trip, we hit somewhere we can do laundry in the middle.
So God raised up Biden? And Obama?
Good to know.
I'm nearly to "These students were born the year my oldest was born."
But that's only because I just teach law students. If it were undergrads, I'd be well past that.
“we learned the lawyers from the other side write the judge’s filings, write her rulings. so i guess… starting to think it’s a set deal.”
i think he’s referring to the extremely normal practice of the judge asking one of the attorneys to prepare a draft of the proposed order lmao
Since the NY Times (as per its awful procedure) failed to post a link to Kash Patel's defamation suit against The Atlantic and Sarah Fitzpatrick, here it is.
Patel's lawyers, Binnall Law Firm, repped NC LG Mark Robinson in aborted defamation suits.
Anti-SLAPP motion coming should be forthcoming.
RICHMOND | FAMILY LAW Judge Orders Return of Emotional Support Cat To Spouse Living in Domestic Violence Shelter Plaintiff commenced a matrimonial action seek-Plaintif commenced a matrimonial action seek- ing an annulment. Defendant asserted that she resided with her minor child in a confidential domestic violence shelter in New York and lacked financial resources as well as access to personal and medical documentation. The parties allegedly acquired a cat known as "MM," which defendant contended served as an emotional support animal. Defendant alleged that plaintiff retained possession of the cat and failed to return it, and further claimed that plaintiff impeded her ability to retrieve personal property pursuant to a prior court order. Plaintiff disputed these allegations. Defendant moved by emergency Order to Show Cause with a Temporary Restraining Order seeking the return of the cat, personal property, and a finding of contempt. The court denied contempt relief but ordered the return of the cat. In balancing the equities under Domestic Relations Law §236(B), the court held that defendant's residence in a domestic violence shelter, lack of financial resources, and the cat's role as a companion animal warranted the relief sought. Issues of valuation or equitable distribution were expressly reserved. ID v OM, (redacted) (April 8)
Cat law cat law cat law
Given who I assume would direct a Jim Caviezel vehicle lionizing famous traitor Jair Bolsonaro, I'm afraid your odds might actually be a little low!
Thanks!
404 with Lady Justice in the 0 pulling off her blindfold.
Just saw the Illinois Board of Admissions to the Bar 404 site and I have to say, they did a good job!
I need to find the complaint. I’m curious if it’s in an anti-SLAAP jurisdiction and who counsel is.
Look. I’m an unemployed idiot who posts too much on social media.
But riddle me this.
All these elites recently seem to be making these claims ie below, UBI, Hassett gas prices, Trump just a little pain for world peace; that are promising fantastical future shit so that the public / govt do
Starting my day at #Lifesavers2026 with "Unified Action: Strengthening Court, Prosecutor & Enforcement Partnerships to Curb Distracted Driving"
A session about a public health approach to traffic safety in Washington state was a close runner-up
New, from me: Take the Palantir manifesto seriously, if not literally.
It reveals that our tech philosopher kings want public money, but without public accountability. This creates a dilemma for governments unaligned with its techno-fascist vision. 🧵
donmoynihan.substack.com/p/palantir-w...
On the blog today, @espinsegall.bsky.social describes how, in his speech equating progressivism with totalitarianism, Justice Thomas shamelessly acknowledgd his benefactor Harlan Crow, never having expressed any reservations or remorse about even the appearance of corruption. 👇
The irony, of course, is that Originalists used to be the ones banging on about this loudest: You needed a rigorous historically-anchored methodology to avoid the delegitimizing appearance that justices were just unelected superlegislators with life terms.
I share Steve’s concerns. An observation:
The Court’s immense power, such as it is, is contingent upon its at least plausibly appearing to do law. This may seem like an academic debate, but it’s literally over whether the Court is doing law or something else. That matters.
I truly can’t think of anybody who has done more harm to the Court and its legitimacy than the post-Gingrich GOP. But Second is very clearly the Roberts Court. 3/3
But once there’s a public perception that law is just Calvinball, without sufficient groundwork, that’s bad for institutional legitimacy and for our democratic system more broadly.
And tbc, this is a problem created by CJ Roberts and the Court, not by outlets reporting on what they’re doing. 2/
And the big problem with the publicly-intelligible disclosures that SCOTUS is doing politics, not law, I’d that rule of law demands public buy-in. Like, I can believe the Justices are unelected politicians, but I also believe broadly that law works and is good, based on party on my training. 1/
