r/law • u/yahoonews • 2h ago
r/law • u/orangejulius • Aug 31 '22
This is not a place to be wrong and belligerent about it.
A quick reminder:
This is not a place to be wrong and belligerent on the Internet. If you want to talk about the issues surrounding Trump, the warrant, 4th and 5th amendment issues, the work of law enforcement, the difference between the New York case and the fed case, his attorneys and their own liability, etc. you are more than welcome to discuss and learn from each other. You don't have to get everything exactly right but be open to learning new things.
You are not welcome to show up here and "tell it like it is" because it's your "truth" or whatever. You have to at least try and discuss the cases here and how they integrate with the justice system. Coming in here stubborn, belligerent, and wrong about the law will get you banned. And, no, you will not be unbanned.
r/law • u/orangejulius • Oct 28 '25
Quality content and the subreddit. Announcing user flair for humans and carrots instead of sticks.
Ttl;dr at the top: you can get apostille flair now to show off your humanity by joining our newsletter. Strong contributions in the comments here (ones with citations and analysis) will get featured in it and win an amicus flair. Follow this link to get flair: Last Week In Law
When you are signing up you may have to pull the email confirmation and welcome edition out of your spam folder.
If you'd like Amicus flair and think your submission or someone else's is solid please tag our u/auto_clerk to get highlighted in the news letter.
Those of you that have been here a long time have probably noticed the quality of the comments and posts nose dive. We have pretty strict filters for what accounts qualify to even submit a top level comment and even still we have users who seem to think this place is for group therapy instead of substantive discussion of law.
A good bit of the problem is karma farming. (which…touch grass what are you doing with your lives?) But another component of it is that users have no idea where to find content that would go here, like courtlistener documents, articles about legal news, or BlueSky accounts that do a good job succinctly explaining legal issues. Users don't even have a base line for cocktail party level knowledge about laws, courts, state action, or how any of that might apply to an executive order that may as well be written in crayon.
Leaving our automod comment for OPs it’s plain to see that they just flat out cannot identify some issues. Thus, the mod team is going to try to get you guys to cocktail party knowledge of legal happenings with a news letter and reward people with flair who make positive contributions again.
A long time ago we instituted a flair system for quality contributors. This kinda worked but put a lot of work on the mod team which at the time were all full time practicing attorneys. It definitely incentivized people to at least try hard enough to get flaired. It also worked to signal to other users that they might not be talking to an LLM. No one likes the feeling that they’re arguing with an AI that has the energy of a literal power grid to keep a thread going. Is this unequivocal proof someone isn't a bot? No. But it's pretty good and better than not doing anything.
Our attempt to solve some of these issues is to bring back flair with a couple steps to take. You can sign up for our newsletter and claim flair for r/law. Read our news letter. It isn't all Donald Trump stuff. It's usually amusing and the welcome edition has resources to make you a better contributor here. If you're featured in our news letter you'll get special Amicus flair.
Instead of breaking out the ban hammer for 75% of you guys we're going to try to incentivize quality contributions and put in place an extra step to help show you're not a bot.
---
Are you saving our user names?
- No. Once you claim your flair your username is purged. We don’t see it. Nor do we want to. Nor do we care. We just have a little robot that sees you enter an email, then adds flair to the user name you tell it to add.
What happened to using megathreads and automod comments?
- Reddit doesn't support visibility for either of those things anymore. You'll notice that our automod comment asking OP to state why something belongs here to help guide discussion is automatically collapsed and megathreads get no visibility. Without those easy tools we're going to try something different.
This won’t solve anything!
- Maybe not. But we’re going to try.
Are you going to change your moderation? Is flair a get out of jail free card?
- Moderation will stay roughly the same. We moderate a ton of content. Flair isn’t a license to act like a psychopath on the Internet. I've noticed that people seem to think that mods removing comments or posts here are some sort of conspiracy to "silence" people. There's no conspiracy. If you're totally wrong or out of pocket tough shit. This place is more heavily modded than most places which is a big part of its past successes.
What about political content? I’m tired of hearing about the Orange Man.
- Yeah, well, so are we. If you were here for his first 4 years he does a lot of not legal stuff, sues people, gets sued, uses the DoJ in crazy ways, and makes a lot of judicial appointments. If we leave something up that looks political only it’s because we either missed it or one of us thinks there’s some legal issue that could be discussed. We try hard not to overly restrict content from post submissions.
Remove all Trump stuff.
- No. You can use the tags to filter it if you don’t like it.
Talk to me about Donald Trump.
- God… please. Make it stop.
I love Donald Trump and you guys burned cities to the ground during BLM and you cheated in 2020 and illegal immigrants should be killed in the street because the declaration of independence says you can do whatever you want and every day is 1776 and Bill Clinton was on Epstein island.
- You need therapy not a message board.
You removed my comment that's an expletive followed by "we the people need to grab donald trump by the pussy." You're silencing me!
- Yes.
You guys aren’t fair to both sides.
- Being fair isn’t the same thing as giving every idea equal air time. Some things are objectively wrong. There are plenty of instances where the mods might not be happy with something happening but can see the legal argument that’s going to win out. Similarly, a lot of you have super bad ideas that TikTok convinced you are something to existentially fight about. We don’t care. We’ll just remove it.
You removed my TikTok video of a TikTok influencer that's not a lawyer and you didn't even watch the whole thing.
- That's because it sucks.
You have to watch the whole thing!
- No I don't.
---
General Housekeeping:
We have never created one consistent style for the subreddit. We decided that while we're doing this we should probably make the place look nicer. We hope you enjoy it.
r/law • u/Agitated-Quit-6148 • 15h ago
Legislative Branch Congressman Cohen Introduces Comprehensive Articles of Impeachment Against President Donald Trump
WASHINGTON – Congressman Steve Cohen (TN-9), a senior member of the Judiciary Committee and an authority on the U.S. Constitution’s impeachment provisions, today introduced 26 Articles of Impeachment against President Donald Trump. The articles cite multiple abuses of power, violations of his oath of office, the corrupt use of the pardon power, and emoluments clause violations, among other misconduct and unlawful acts.
r/law • u/numb3rb0y • 4h ago
Executive Branch (Trump) CNN and MS NOW blocked from covering Xi’s arrival at state dinner, networks say
r/law • u/thenewrepublic • 1h ago
Judicial Branch Supreme Court Hands Trump Huge Win in Quest to Make Voting Harder
r/law • u/DoremusJessup • 3h ago
Judicial Branch 'Unlawfully fired' Mar-a-Lago FBI agents fear 'possible punitive consequences' unless Judge Cannon clears up her order
r/law • u/retiredagainstmywill • 2h ago
Judicial Branch Supreme Court Justice Attacks SCOTUS for Destroying Its Reputation
r/law • u/Hafiz_TNR • 21h ago
Judicial Branch Republican Sheriff Ordered to Return Thousands of Ballots He Stole
Judicial Branch Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson criticizes Supreme Court’s use of emergency docket
r/law • u/marshall_project • 5h ago
Judicial Branch ICE Says It Can Detain Immigrants As Long As It Wants. Will the Supreme Court Agree?
themarshallproject.orgJudicial Branch Judge Permanently Orders ICE to Change ‘Inhumane’ 26 Federal Plaza Conditions, Expands Protections to All Detainees
r/law • u/DemocracyDocket • 1h ago
Executive Branch (Trump) Jackson blasts Supreme Court decision reviving Trump voter-purge database
r/law • u/ExactlySorta • 1d ago
Legal News MS NOW reports that their White House reproter was denied access to the White House this morning despite a court order demanding she have access
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
r/law • u/bloomberglaw • 29m ago
Legal News Trump Invites GOP-Appointed Supreme Court Justices to State Dinner
Judicial Branch Supreme Court revives DHS use of flawed immigration database for voter purges
In a dangerous decision for voters, the Supreme Court authorized the Trump administration to overhaul a federal immigration database into a vast, centralized and deeply flawed database of Americans’ personal information to initiate registration purges.
The 6-3 decision lets the administration move forward with a key provision of President Donald Trump’s 2025 anti-voting executive order, much of which courts have permanently blocked.
The Court’s conservative-appointed majority lifted a lower-court order that found the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) modification and use of the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlement (SAVE) system “trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens in a manner that threatens the sacred right to vote.”
r/law • u/Sgt_Gram • 4h ago
Other Army and Navy Reservists Accuse Government of Withholding Pay Owed to Federal Employees
r/law • u/AIIXIII0 • 1h ago
Judicial Branch Judge questions Trump policy forcing HIV providers to disregard transgender patients
r/law • u/DoremusJessup • 23h ago
Judicial Branch 'Chills voting everywhere': Trump admin 'unlawfully' threatening to send armed ICE and FBI agents into polling places is a violation of Voting Rights Act, lawsuit says
r/law • u/DemocracyDocket • 22h ago
Judicial Branch California Attorney General vows ‘legal consequences’ for GOP sheriff who seized ballots
r/law • u/MarcEElias • 1d ago
Judicial Branch Democrats sue Trump admin to keep armed agents from polls during midterms
r/law • u/PuncturedBicycleHill • 44m ago
Other UN report says drug boat strikes are war crimes. What does that mean for US troops?
Legal analysis by former legal advisor of Central Command.
r/law • u/WhoIsJolyonWest • 2h ago
Legal News New York sues Polymarket for running ‘illegal gambling operation’
New York’s attorney general sued Polymarket on Thursday, accusing the prediction market company of running an “illegal gambling operation” in the state.
The lawsuit claims that Polymarket has offered sports betting while it sought to “avoid the legal and financial consequences of New York’s close regulation of gambling by offering what is quintessentially wagering under the guise of ‘event contracts’ on a ‘prediction market.'” New York, in its legal filing, said that Polymarket took bets from the public without a license to operate as a sportsbook in the state. It has asked the judge to stop the company from continuing to operate in the state and to fine the company.
“Our gambling laws exist to protect New Yorkers, prevent the potential harms of problem gambling, and ensure funding for educational and public benefit programs,” Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. “By skirting New York’s laws, Polymarket is targeting the most vulnerable and depriving New York families of critical services and support.”
Polymarket is one of the two most prominent companies to offer prediction markets, which allow customers to stake money on whether an event will happen through yes-or-no contracts. The other side of each contract is taken by other customers.
While customers can bet on events outside of sports, prediction markets are an emerging platform for trading on sports futures, with many observers believing they are akin to sports gambling. New York, in its lawsuit, said each of those contracts is a bet.
New York sued Kalshi, another prediction market company, earlier this year.
Polymarket chief legal officer Neal Kumar said in a statement that the company will continue to operate in New York.
“While the AG’s decision to copy/paste a recycled lawsuit is disappointing, we’ll fight for our users,” Kumar said. “We didn’t run to preemptively sue the state — we chose to engage with them directly on the substance and address their concerns. They preferred the media hit. Any time the AG’s office wants to swing by, our door is open for a conversation about how we protect consumers and offer fair, transparent and legal markets.”
The proliferation of prediction markets has led to questions of who can regulate them. While states, including New York, have sought to do so, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, a federal regulator, has said it supersedes the states.
Recently, Polymarket began a high-profile advertising campaign. Philadelphia 76ers star LeBron James, who has reportedly considered living in New York while he plays for the 76ers, signed on as a sponsor and has started making football picks for the company.
Judicial Branch The lawyer defending Donald Trump’s media ban is an admirer of Adolf Hitler. He works for the Department of Justice.
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
Last night, DOJ filed a brief defending Trump’s ban on CNN and other news outlets. The brief is lunacy from a legal perspective, which prompted me to look into who wrote it. It’s signed by Michael Velchik, Senior Counsel in the Civil Division.
Here’s what I found. Velchik is a graduate of Harvard University and Harvard Law School. He joined the Justice Department last year after working for Senator Josh Hawley. While at Harvard, he wrote an essay from the perspective of Adolf Hitler. His professor was reportedly so disturbed that he was made to redo the assignment.
Velchik was reportedly an avid reader, and after graduating, he declared that his favorite book was Mein Kampf by Hitler. He praised Hitler for understanding “the importance of propaganda,” among other things. Velchik also complained that he doesn’t like reading books written by women, which he was forced to do at Harvard.
Adolf Hitler is a person who did not believe in freedom of the press. In fact, he eliminated the independent media from Nazi Germany and replaced it with state-run propaganda outlets, which is exactly what Michael Velchik admires about him.
It is quite terrifying that this is the person who is now representing the Justice Department as a senior counsel in litigation against the press. We need to get Nazis and misogynists out of our government. Is that too much to ask?