I think the next time someone asks me why I teach Con Law as an APD class, I’m just gonna show them that ad and yell “thats why!” until they slowly back out of the room.

“In 1776, America made a promise. In 1941, we proved we meant it.”

WTF is this slop?

It makes me sad that there is no universe in which I would ever buy a Jeep, because it means I can’t actually boycott them for the idiotic, jingoistic, historically illiterate ads they’re running.

WANT

My friends, the loaded crab fries at Camden Yards are a religious experience.

Until the moment I had them, I would clearly have said the Frito pie at my Houston Little League snack bar, which … I would pay dearly for that Frito pie right now.

Ah, just about the right-wing attack on the academy, promoted by the article about all the senior folks leaving Texas A&M and Texas Tech

ngl, I would definitely stop at Warren’s Burger on a road trip

He’s in the Department of Ed GC office. If you want to talk specifics, happy to do so …

Look, I was a damn good Little League pitcher, but if I could go back again, I’d spend more time with the frito pie

*dies in Chadha*

small ball ftw

My friends, the loaded crab fries at Camden Yards are a religious experience.

Until the moment I had them, I would clearly have said the Frito pie at my Houston Little League snack bar, which … I would pay dearly for that Frito pie right now.

Plus every now and then the pitcher threw a wild pitch under the old system

okay

If we’re gonna do this nonsense where pitchers don’t actually have to throw four balls to intentionally walk someone, then at the very least they should tell the batters before they put on their seventeen pieces of padding

I grew up in Houston in the 80s, so I’m definitely not impartial here

Don’t fully remember but it was something attributing bad faith to Steve without any actual evidence other than disagreement with his conclusions.

Because if you think that is inappropriate, then you have a *lot* of criticizing to do.

But *why* is that different from a former, say, Ginsburg clerk praising an opinion she wrote?

I post that the Speech or Debate Clause might sometimes immunize bad conduct and I get thousands of folks yelling at me for weeks.

And you post stuff like this and just ... 🦗🦗🦗

To be clear, I‘d love it if legal academics were less obsessed with the Supreme Court. But that is presumably a criterion that should be applied across the board.

If your principle is that Supreme Court clerks shouldn’t comment on Suoreme Court issues, you’re gonna have to disqualify a lot of academic commentators in addition to Steve.

i honestly don’t know how many distinct topics that hed is covering

I know the posts flow through tubes connected to big computers, but after that I get lost

Ah. My bad …?

I am not a “licensed attorney,” nor have I ever been, nor have I ever taken the MPRE. I hold myself out as an expert on those things on which I am an expert, and not on other things.

But of course one’s history should come to bear on the question of whether one is arguing in good faith or not.

It’s a two-way street. You gotta be willing to criticize your friends, and you gotta be accepting of good-faith arguments from your opponents. And statute should have nothing to do with it either way.

And that’s all the more reason IMO why we shouldn’t confuse even vigorous criticism with acrimony Or accusations of bad faith. They are orthogonal to one another.

honestly can’t remember. internet rando.