Balls & Strikes
LightNews LightNews
banner
ballsandstrikes.org
Balls & Strikes
@ballsandstrikes.org
7.3K followers 8 following 790 posts
A nonprofit media outlet for progressive, bullshit-free commentary about courts, judges, and the legal system they uphold. Run by @jaywillis.net.
Posts Replies Media Videos
ballsandstrikes.org
This is fucking monstrous ballsandstrikes.org/legal-cultur...
For most prospective lawyers, the path to licensure is both arduous and relatively straightforward: spend three years in law school, cram for a two-day-long bar exam, submit an application for licensure, and, if all goes well, attend a swearing-in ceremony. However, the story can be very different for those who have a criminal conviction, an eviction, a civil judgement against them, mental health disabilities, or financial issues. Such was the case for one applicant, Jessica Younts, who had a felony drug conviction. After completing her sentence and attending law school, she applied for licensure in New York. Instead of breezing through the process like many of her peers, she endured what can only be described as a hazing ritual: Bar officials subjected her to multiple hostile interviews that interrogated aspects of her life wholly unconnected to the practice of law, such as whether all her children had the same father. She was even asked probing questions about her arrest, requiring her to recount specific details of that day, which essentially relitigated her already-adjudicated criminal matter. As a result, a process that takes most law school graduates a few months took Jessica four years—and in the end, she was still denied.
August 28, 2025 at 8:38 PM
ballsandstrikes.org
Trump's judicial nominees know exactly what to say to not lie, but to not really tell the truth either ballsandstrikes.org/nominations/...
The second (and more troubling) trend is that Obergefell v. Hodges, the now decade-old Supreme Court decision recognizing a right to same-sex marriage, is squarely in the judiciary’s crosshairs. Several nominees were asked whether cases like Brown v. Board of Education, which held school segregation unconstitutional, and Loving v. Virginia, which struck down bans on interracial marriage, were correctly decided, and all agreed that they were. But when asked if the same was true of Obergefell, they all demurred. Tung said only that “the Supreme Court granted such a right.” Mercer described it as “binding precedent,” but said it wasn’t his job to “grade the Supreme Court.” The implication of their careful treatment of Obergefell was clear to anyone listening: These nominees, like those during Trump’s first term who described Roe and Casey as “the law of the land” and “precedent on precedent,” are foaming at the mouth to undermine and eventually overturn Obergefell and relegate same-sex couples to second class status.
August 7, 2025 at 11:45 AM
ballsandstrikes.org
Emil Bove is everything Trump wants in a federal judge ballsandstrikes.org/nominations/...
June 24, 2025 at 7:44 PM
ballsandstrikes.org
Trump asks Supreme Court to make it 1857 again ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/birth...
trump holding up executive order
May 16, 2025 at 12:20 AM
ballsandstrikes.org
screenshot of the CJ McCollum "Im trying Jennifer" tweet
January 2, 2025 at 5:04 PM
ballsandstrikes.org
Okay, let's try and figure out the "deal" that Senate Democrats just made with Republicans about the remaining judicial nominations https://buff.ly/4eJYR90
November 21, 2024 at 10:00 PM
ballsandstrikes.org
The Supreme Court's most important feature is its ability to bullshit https://buff.ly/3Ut7MEC
October 30, 2024 at 6:16 PM