Lazyeye
@lazeeye.bsky.social
“Lazarus died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. In time the rich man also died. When he woke up in hell…”
Submitting a sham declaration, then withdrawing the declaration, is a bad idea in any court. It is a *terrible* idea if you are appearing before the Hon. William Alsup.
March 13, 2025 at 5:51 PM
Submitting a sham declaration, then withdrawing the declaration, is a bad idea in any court. It is a *terrible* idea if you are appearing before the Hon. William Alsup.
I liked S2E08 of Severance (“Salt’s Neck”). If Patricia Arquette can breathe humanity into Harmony Cobel, she can probably do anything.
March 8, 2025 at 2:31 AM
I liked S2E08 of Severance (“Salt’s Neck”). If Patricia Arquette can breathe humanity into Harmony Cobel, she can probably do anything.
Yes. An example from dicta in MVA v Mansky is in the pic below. This was quoted in the FDC ruling that denied Douglass Mackey’s 1A challenge to his indictment (pic also below). A test statute has to be drafted to require a causal nexus between the disinfo and legally cognizable harm.
March 7, 2025 at 6:26 PM
Yes. An example from dicta in MVA v Mansky is in the pic below. This was quoted in the FDC ruling that denied Douglass Mackey’s 1A challenge to his indictment (pic also below). A test statute has to be drafted to require a causal nexus between the disinfo and legally cognizable harm.
Get a load of this owning-the-libs line by Alito. I had to laugh.
March 5, 2025 at 6:59 PM
Get a load of this owning-the-libs line by Alito. I had to laugh.
This line from Alito ($-Leo) has to be him trolling us.
March 5, 2025 at 6:00 PM
This line from Alito ($-Leo) has to be him trolling us.
Probably not, because it’s not a an “… administrative [or] judicial order[] forbidding certain communications… issued in advance of the time such communications are to occur.”
March 4, 2025 at 10:33 PM
Probably not, because it’s not a an “… administrative [or] judicial order[] forbidding certain communications… issued in advance of the time such communications are to occur.”
Because it’s not an “…administrative and judicial orders forbidding certain communications when issued in advance of the time that such communications are to occur."
February 25, 2025 at 9:54 PM
Because it’s not an “…administrative and judicial orders forbidding certain communications when issued in advance of the time that such communications are to occur."
True. It can be confusing cuz SCOTUS defines prior restraint as enjoining speech before it occurs. But it has also applied PR to a rule that impaired distribution of already-published books. And it has said PR requires an “adequate” determination that speech is unprotected before it can be enjoined
February 21, 2025 at 11:32 PM
True. It can be confusing cuz SCOTUS defines prior restraint as enjoining speech before it occurs. But it has also applied PR to a rule that impaired distribution of already-published books. And it has said PR requires an “adequate” determination that speech is unprotected before it can be enjoined
It’s confusing cuz SCOTUS has (1) adopted a definition of prior restraint that suggests it only applies to orders prohibiting speech that hasn’t occurred yet, but (2) applied PR in a case where censorship impaired *circulation of already-published material, which is what the TRO in this case does.
February 21, 2025 at 4:25 PM
It’s confusing cuz SCOTUS has (1) adopted a definition of prior restraint that suggests it only applies to orders prohibiting speech that hasn’t occurred yet, but (2) applied PR in a case where censorship impaired *circulation of already-published material, which is what the TRO in this case does.
Fair question, as SCOTUS defines PR to apply when speech hasn’t occurred yet. But SCOTUS has also applied PR to censorship that impairs circulation of already-published books. Here the judicial order is only a TRO. There’s been no final decision the article is defamatory. That might be why it’s PR.
February 20, 2025 at 4:43 PM
Fair question, as SCOTUS defines PR to apply when speech hasn’t occurred yet. But SCOTUS has also applied PR to censorship that impairs circulation of already-published books. Here the judicial order is only a TRO. There’s been no final decision the article is defamatory. That might be why it’s PR.
This is never a problem for me when working in the greatest word processing software application of all time:
February 19, 2025 at 9:06 PM
This is never a problem for me when working in the greatest word processing software application of all time:
“Islands in the Stream” is an inapt metaphor for soul mates
February 19, 2025 at 4:49 PM
“Islands in the Stream” is an inapt metaphor for soul mates
I was in SF for a court hearing on Tuesday, so I went to New St. Mary’s to pray. I saw this tablet by the Flight-into-Egypt display. Seems like a timely reminder of the Christian obligations you mention:
February 13, 2025 at 7:09 PM
I was in SF for a court hearing on Tuesday, so I went to New St. Mary’s to pray. I saw this tablet by the Flight-into-Egypt display. Seems like a timely reminder of the Christian obligations you mention:
I had an appearance in SF today, so when it was over I took the liberty of visiting New St. Mary’s while waiting for Tommy’s Joynt to open. Saw this by the Flight-to-Egypt Niche. Seems timely:
February 12, 2025 at 12:50 AM
I had an appearance in SF today, so when it was over I took the liberty of visiting New St. Mary’s while waiting for Tommy’s Joynt to open. Saw this by the Flight-to-Egypt Niche. Seems timely:
My work took me into SF today, so I stopped by New St. Mary’s and saw this reminder of what Christianity is supposed to be about:
February 11, 2025 at 11:16 PM
My work took me into SF today, so I stopped by New St. Mary’s and saw this reminder of what Christianity is supposed to be about:
I was a voted-least-likely-to-watch-musical-theater type, until I took my mom to see Les Miz for her bday. At the Curran in SF, late 1980s. It was magical! I saw it 2 more times and wore out the soundtrack.
February 8, 2025 at 3:44 PM
I was a voted-least-likely-to-watch-musical-theater type, until I took my mom to see Les Miz for her bday. At the Curran in SF, late 1980s. It was magical! I saw it 2 more times and wore out the soundtrack.
Love Yeats. A turning point in my life was the poetry textbook in English 102 at CCSF in the mid 1980s. Taught me how to read poetry, and knowing how to read poetry = loving poetry. A Prayer for My Son & Under Ben Bulben are 2 of my favorites.
January 29, 2025 at 2:29 AM
Love Yeats. A turning point in my life was the poetry textbook in English 102 at CCSF in the mid 1980s. Taught me how to read poetry, and knowing how to read poetry = loving poetry. A Prayer for My Son & Under Ben Bulben are 2 of my favorites.
Today Clarence Thomas rebuked the 6th Cir. for disrespecting rule of law
Clarence Thomas, who takes off-the-books largesse from billionaires
Clarence Thomas, whose WWH dissent told TX how to keep enforcing its unconstitutional SB8
So I’m not taking any rule-of-law lectures from Clarence Thomas
Clarence Thomas, who takes off-the-books largesse from billionaires
Clarence Thomas, whose WWH dissent told TX how to keep enforcing its unconstitutional SB8
So I’m not taking any rule-of-law lectures from Clarence Thomas
January 27, 2025 at 7:22 PM
Today Clarence Thomas rebuked the 6th Cir. for disrespecting rule of law
Clarence Thomas, who takes off-the-books largesse from billionaires
Clarence Thomas, whose WWH dissent told TX how to keep enforcing its unconstitutional SB8
So I’m not taking any rule-of-law lectures from Clarence Thomas
Clarence Thomas, who takes off-the-books largesse from billionaires
Clarence Thomas, whose WWH dissent told TX how to keep enforcing its unconstitutional SB8
So I’m not taking any rule-of-law lectures from Clarence Thomas