As a law student of the early 20-teens, who was often disappointed by the court but was always kinda star-struck by the high level "doing law" of it all, watching the court over the last 10 years as a practicing lawyer has been very intellectually destabilizing.

(Also Anders briefs shouldn't exist thank you so much)

And that is especially true if the argument the appellee fails to make is a discretionary one (harmless error, the exclusionary rule defenses to a 4A claim). I guess all this to say that party presentation should lead to forfeiture by appellees (much) more often but is not a forced error pact. /end.

In other words, if the appellant's argument is defensible of its own force and the appellee fails to articulate a defensible response, the appellate court need not (and should not) attempt to articulate a better argument on behalf of the appellee. /4

If appellant argues X and there is legal and factual support for X and the appellee fails to argue Y as a counter to X, the appellant should win on argument X even if a reasonable jurist might think Y is the best answer. /3

I think the basic idea of "party presentation does not compel the court to reach wrong results" is a fine proposition. But the conclusion from that idea does not have to be "and therefore we are unmoored from what the parties have argued." /2

I think about this issue way too much because Illinois is a very enthusiastic "affirm on any basis supported by the record" jurisdiction such that forfeiture by appellees is basically not a thing (even though it's in our Supreme Court's rules). /1

Ah, to live in a state that values its own constitution…

This ages better with every passing hour

I miss not knowing who Ilan Wurman is.

I would love for world events to stop having near-exact corollaries to episodes of Madame Secretary

So far, the only acceptable use case for AI has been Disco Lord of the Rings

“Sure, um, not true” could have been the entire Respondent brief in this case.

I’m always glad that Alito goes so early in seriatim questioning because then he gets thoroughly trounced by SS, EK, and KBJ, and doesn’t get to respond.

And the Bruen-ification (or, rather, Rahimification) of the constitution proceeds apace.

BUT, in the part of Chiles that does "history," the court says the broad regulatory tradition of States policing the medical profession is insufficiently analogous to justify bringing conversion therapy within the ambit of professional speech jurisprudence.

The majesty of the law.

Loving the new inconsistency in historical "methodology" for First and Second Amendment claims. Faced with the reality that faithful application of Bruen invalidates most modern gun laws, the Court quickly said, lol JK you don't need an historical twin just a general regulatory vibe.

As a city-dweller, this debate is confusing to me. When I lived with my parents we kept our garbage can in our garage so to put poop in it you either (a) had to commit a B&E, or (b) you had to wait until it was full at the curb in the hours before the trash collector came, in which case get a grip.

Girl, I Guess: Your go-to Resource for Illinois Elections The only place you'll need to go to register, research, and vote in Illinois.

www.girliguess.com (all races)

2026primary.injusticewatch.org (judges)

leyhane.blogspot.com (judges)

The most hilarious thing about the entire Bruen project is that arming literally everyone is so unpalatable to the Supreme Court that we're going to wind up right back at intermediate scrutiny.

It’s actually not part of your civic duty to watch a decrepit imbecile rant about his made-up personal grievances for two hours, y’all just hate yourselves.

If Justice Kagan ever thinks so little of your argument that she only deigns to respond in a footnote…gird your loins.

For the Cook County folks!

So I love that Bad Bunny will piss off all the right people, but I’m also very glad for the reminder, in these bullshit times, that the United States does not define what it means to be American.

I had a Chilean professor for one of my Spanish-language literature courses in college and he always told us that, when traveling in the Americas, we should never say “soy Americano/a” (I’m American) because so is the person we’re talking to. And it would be disrespectful to act like the US=America.

Football is a fall sport and should be over before Christmas I need you all to shut all the way up.

One of my favorite things about never having been in private practice is that I’ve never had to learn what Super Lawyers are.

Faithfully applying Bruen, Rahimi should have won and Hawaii should lose. But that fact only proves Bruen’s incoherence as a methodology.