Trademark, advertising, and more
Rebecca Tushnet is an American legal scholar. She serves as the Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law at Harvard Law School. Her scholarship focuses on copyright, trademark, First Amendment, and false advertising. .. more
Reposted by Rosemary A. Joyce, Rebecca Tushnet
Reposted by Rebecca Tushnet
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/24/u...
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/24/u...
Reposted by Rebecca Tushnet
![Queering the Hypermasculine: Sports RPF’s Intervention
So what is the appeal of sports RPF fandoms—if, as discussed, the mainstream fandom is
explicitly hostile towards women and queer people, who make up the majority of fandom
members? Or, as one Twitter user put it shortly before asserting that they are in fact strongly
opposed to RPF, about the popularity of hockey RPF on the internet, “what is in the ice rink water
that gets people on ao3 SO heated about the concept of these real life canadian [sic] jocks kissing.”
As mentioned in chapter 1, individual athletes are marketed much like other celebrities in order to
attract fans to them and the teams, and to convince fans ultimately to spend money. It should
therefore not come as a surprise that some fans choose to engage with athletes the same way they
do with other stars—with an added twist to many other RPF fandoms.
In contrast to the male-dominated and often overtly sexist, homophobic, and transphobic
mainstream sports fandom, participating in sports RPF fandoms is a way for people who feel
excluded from this mainstream sports fandom, are hesitant to join, or just plainly seek a different
type of fandom, to engage with the sport we love in the predominantly queer/female space of
fandom. Returning to the Jenkins quotation at the beginning of the previous section, the
“contemporary myth” of mainstream sports fandom is that of a masculine sphere—a testosterone-
filled series of battles by manly men, for manly men—whereas men’s sports RPF represents an
intervention to repair the damage. Deliberate or not, conscious or not—any engagement in sports
RPF fandom may be seen as a critical intervention](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ij5rmezbkvim2egrp3gb7g3s/bafkreiglqvt36vhzhltar7xy2nivk37qskjdjilwzmlitl65uepn3vvhbq@jpeg)
Reposted by Rebecca Tushnet
"These findings suggest that women in evaluative positions face disproportionate resistance when delivering negative assessments."
Reposted by Nina Jankowicz, Lisa W. Fazio, Stephan Lewandowsky , and 20 more Nina Jankowicz, Lisa W. Fazio, Stephan Lewandowsky, Will Jennings, Gavin A. Schmidt, Tom Clark, Scott L. Greer, Steve Peers, John McLaren, David H. Kaye, Daniel W. Drezner, Smith, Rebecca Tushnet, Alan Richardson, Michael D. McDonald, Erica Weintraub Austin, Timothy Graham, Kate Starbird, Lisa Diedrich, Josh Pasek, Sam Kamin, Richard M. Carpiano, Nathan P. Kalmoe
My father-in-law is reading In Covid’s Wake, and excitedly told me he found a passage where I’m quoted. The quote in question is me saying the FBI worked to censor speech on social media.
Huh? When did I say that?!
One CBS staffer tells me: "She really has no idea how insulting she comes across."
Reposted by Rebecca Tushnet
Reposted by Rebecca Tushnet
Reposted by Anna O. Law, Daniel W. Drezner, Rebecca Tushnet
Reposted by Steve Peers, Leigh Sparks, Rebecca Tushnet
Reposted by Rebecca Tushnet
Reposted by Rebecca Tushnet
🗃️
Reposted by Rebecca Tushnet
Reposted by Anna O. Law, Steve Peers, Rebecca Tushnet
Reposted by Anna O. Law, Kim L. Scheppele, Steve Peers , and 12 more Anna O. Law, Kim L. Scheppele, Steve Peers, Rosemary A. Joyce, Juan Cole, Robert C. Richards, Rebecca Tushnet, Alan Richardson, David R. Miller, Michael Zimmer, Scott A. Imberman, Daxton R. Stewart, Robert L. Tsai, Manisha Sinha, Aviel Roshwald
![The Government asked this Court to stay the District Court's order. After the response and reply were filed, JUSTICE BARRETT referred the application to the Court. We directed the parties to file supplemental letter briefs on an issue that the District Court had addressed but the parties' initial briefs had not: the meaning of the term "regular forces" in §12406(3). In its supplemental brief, the Government argues that the term refers to civilian law enforcement officers, such as those employed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement or the Federal Protective Service.
Respondents, echoing the District Court, maintain that the term refers to the regular forces of the United States mili-tary.
We conclude that the term "regular forces" in §12406(3) likely refers to the regular forces of the United States mili-tary. This interpretation means that to call the Guard into active federal service under §12406(3), the President must be "unable" with the regular military "to execute the laws of the United States." Because the statute requires an assessment of the military's ability to execute the laws, it likely applies only where the military could legally execute the laws. Such circumstances are exceptional: Under the Posse Comitatus Act, the military is prohibited from "execut[ing] the laws" "except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress."
18 U. S. C. §1385. So before the President can federalize the Guard under §12406(3), he likely must have statutory or constitutional authority to execute the laws with the regular military and must be "unable" with those forces to perform that function.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreiftbhzwvn3vgwhqsi7k2paizvdw4t26ailljvovso3chqupnmj364@jpeg)
Reposted by Rebecca Tushnet
![. . . very cooperative, but the police at that point had to let [redacted] know that what she had done that she could be facing charges.
Q And that was after they had told her earlier that she didn't need an attorney present, correct?
A Exactly.
Q Okay. So this happens to her with the Palm Beach Police Department and did the Palm Beach Police actually present or propose charging [redacted]?
A They did get a probable cause affidavit against [redacted].
Q And is that why Ms. [redacted] and her attorney were concerned about her testimony here?
A Yes.
Q Now was a subpoena issued for Ms. [redacted] on behalf of this grand jury?
A Yes, it was.
Q And before Ms. [redacted] would comply with that, did she -- did her attorney request some sort of order?
A Yes.
Q And what did he ask for?
A He asked for immunity for [redacted].](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:eoss3vmzem55cm5kuddhdmwn/bafkreiariijffjjrgfh26o22jjr76pwprinvnbpkcho5lyi2sucfbqlooy@jpeg)
Reposted by Jan W. Mueller, Eric Goldman, Rebecca Tushnet
One brought a gun home.
One moved.
Others improved home security.
Life as a federal judge in the age of Trump:
www.nbcnews.com/politics/pol...
Reposted by Eric Goldman
Reposted by Rebecca Tushnet
