RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
No bio...
User ID: 3756
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
I have worked long enough in the system that, while I wasn't 100% sure, I would've been comfortable betting a $20 on the race of the perpetrator just from the provided summary. I'm sure reading the opinion would've added details to make me even more confident.
The most unremarked-upon abuse (for people outside the system) among the black community is the "auntie" (perhaps a bio relation of the mother or father, but maybe an adult female friend of the family instead) who takes a male's virginity when he's 11-13. It is so common among black male clients that the uncommon scenario is where a client didn't have it happen to him. Really digging into some of these nested layers of dysfunction make some horror novels feel like light beach reading.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
Court opinions are the gateway to a (often horrifying) land beyond imagination.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
If I'm catching the drift of this boo outgroup post, it prompts me to wonder this: for the average person, who to the extent they pay attention to the news, has seen mainstream media and the government burn all credibility in the past decade... what are they supposed to do? Every institution they're supposed to trust has lied outrageously. Are they supposed to double down and believe the NYT and MSNBC even harder?
I agree that doing the 100% opposite of what the mainstream says is probably not ideal, but other options are tough. Are they supposed to devote hours per day like us very online types to sort out all the lies and misleading claims to try to chart their own semi-orthogonal path?
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
I would be interested to hear if you've found anything more reliable than the old "best indicator is whether a man's mother's father went bald" (which doesn't seem terribly accurate).
My 77yo father is Norwood 0, as am I in my 40s, so my vested interest is minimal.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
The second one: someone charged in my state with sex with two minors under 15 would be held without bond or with a million dollar cash bond. Released OR is insane. And they would be looking at life in prison with no parole. When I read stories like that from other states, it's so alien to my practice that it might as well be fiction.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
Leftist political argumentation baffles me, and looking at all the different ways to analyze things in a conservative way (textualist, originalist, etc), I fail to find any similar differentiation on the left side of the law. This isn't the first time I've felt this way about left wing judges. They seem to be far more activist.
Breyer wrote a book defending his "pragmatism"--you could read it and see what you think. I haven't read it.
I agree with your general point. The liberals on the court have a tendency towards viewing a case through the lens of "do I agree with the policy at issue," and then proceeding from there. The conservatives are more likely to come out all over the place depending on where their textualism or originalism takes them. When I heard him speak in the early 2000s, Scalia was quite critical of the "hippies" in Texas v. Johnson but thought the first amendment required that result. Thomas' dissent in Lawrence v. Texas noted he thought the law at issue was "uncommonly silly" and he'd vote to repeal it if he were in the Texas legislature, but that it was constitutional since there is no general right to privacy. That sort of "I don't like this law/conduct, but I think the constitution allows/protects it" conclusion seems to only come from one side of the Court.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
This isn't just an internal Dem party thing. This strategy is even prevalent in local government in red states.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
Progress continues on my 200 snatch goal. I carved out some headroom above 130 reps. But man, it sucks getting old. First something in my mid right back tweaked the fuck out. Sprained or knotted something so fierce I could barely get out of bed the next day. Eventually stretched/massaged that out. Then something in my right shoulder hurt so fucking bad I couldn't reach behind myself to wipe my own ass with my right hand. And more or less only that movement in specific caused problems. I could actually still do tons and tons of snatches no problem. Lots of stretching and massage for that too. Both those problems have gone away and don't seem to be coming back. But now my fucking fifth metacarpal on my right hand, which I broke in my 20's, has decided to ache for days every time I do my 100+ snatch reps.
Extremely high volume work is for 20somethings. If you are past 40, extremely high volume work is the path to injuries. You can absolutely continue to build strength and reduce fat past 40 (source: self), but I think anything more than 5x10 (like the Wendler Boring But Big plan) is asking for trouble.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
Especially the average white male county judge in counties where they are elected. Oh boy.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
Bottom tier: Sotomayor and KBJ. There are random white male judges (who went to unremarkable state law schools) I could pick from my state's court of appeals (not even supreme court) who would leave both in the dust.
Next tier: Kavanaugh and Barrett. Subpar by federal appellate judge standards. Probably still higher than most of the recent retirees from the Supreme Court, though.
Next tier: Thomas (probably higher when younger--some of his opinions interpreting and harmonizing conflicting federal statutes are not for lightweights) and Roberts. Maybe Gorsuch, but maybe he's highest tier. Gorsuch's writing style is excessively casual and sometimes sloppy, which I don't think is a good feature for a justice.
Highest tier: Alito and Kagan.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
The U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in United States v. Skrmetti.
In a 6-3 decision, it held that:
Tennessee’s law prohibiting certain medical treatments for transgender minors is not subject to heightened scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and satisfies rational basis review.
The outcome was more or less decided by the threshold question: which type of review applies? There are 3 options:
- laws that classify on the basis of race, alienage, or national origin trigger strict scrutiny and will pass constitutional muster “only if they are suitably tailored to serve a compelling state interest.”
- laws containing sex-based classifications to intermediate scrutiny, under which the State must show that the “classification serves important governmental objectives and that the discriminatory means employed are substantially related to the achievement of those objectives.”
- laws that classify in some other way, which only get rational basis review (almost impossible for a law to fail this one).
The Tennessee law at issue didn't fall into category 1, so the argument was about whether it was category 2 or 3. Per the Court:
Here, however, SB1 does not mask sex-based classifications. For reasons we have explained, the law does not prohibit conduct for one sex that it permits for the other. Under SB1, no minor may be administered puberty blockers or hormones to treat gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, or gender incongruence; minors of any sex may be administered puberty blockers or hormones for other purposes.
Once the law fell into category 3, that was pretty much that. There is some wiggling around to deal with Gorsuch's opinion in Bostock (which is what causes Alito to concur in parts of the opinion rather than the full thing since he dissented from Bostock), but Gorsuch joined this opinion in full, so apparently he didn't have a problem with the Court somewhat limiting Bostock here.
As one might expect, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented--they think intermediate scrutiny should apply. I cannot impartially comment on Sotomayor's dissent because most everything of hers that I read makes me think that Larry Tribe was, if anything, too kind in his remarks.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
Tracking time is one of several reasons that I've never attempted to make the jump into private practice as an attorney. Living life by the 6-minute increment sounds dreadful.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
1 in 5 cyclists are normal human beings, and the other 4 are CYCLISTS.
And those 4 CYCLISTS are basically Groundkeeper Willie from the meme. "You cyclists sure are a contentious people." "You just made an enemy for life!"
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
With my current pickup with its all-terrain tires? About 70 mph.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
You were not raised religious in any way, and that's how you found your way to it?
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
It is a never-ending project to try to avoid feeding information to the Algorithms. No social media. Using minimal apps. Using a browser with as much blocking as possible to do anything online (such as watch YT videos). Never being logged into a site like Google or Amazon when searching or shopping prior to buying. How many lunatics are really willing to go to those lengths to avoid the creation of that second subconscious?
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
I know quoting Vonnegut is a midwit reddit thing, but his line from Mother Night is applicable here:
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be."
People in the attention-based economy are relearning it the hard way.
RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
1mo ago
For those of you who were not born into/raised with some kind of religion, how did you find your way to it in your adulthood?
I'm a male lawyer in my mid-40s. I was raised by irreligious boomers (who have drifted into extreme anti-religion in their old age). My childhood experience of religion was essentially zero. I'm not a hard atheist or anti-religious, but I also don't feel a "god-shaped hole" where many people seem to try to shove some kind of belief system (including the Current Thing) in an attempt to fill it. It seems more like I'm lacking the socket where some kind of faith module would even go.
I do much outdoors (pondering hiking the PCT next year, which wouldn't be my first thru-hike) and enough time outside will have me thinking "this has to be intentional Creation to explain why it's so amazing in so many ways." But it's a big gap from there to "sin is real and Jesus Christ was the son of God and sent to cleanse me of my sins" (yes, I'm aware that gap is where faith comes in).
I have investigated some churches around me, but all feel very culturally Alien (discounting the ones that would clearly be a bad fit since their doctrine appears to be "We Support the Current Thing, but we do so with a sprinkling of Jesus"). Church websites alone are enough to give me that Alien feeling. It's like the "Women Lawyers" associations that are technically open to all (to avoid problems with anti-discrimination laws) and some men do join, but it would take a Hannibal Lecter gurney and straitjacket to get me there--it is so obviously Not My Place that I would never go voluntarily. I get that feeling from any church I've looked into, too. So I can't say of the options I have near me call me into trying to learn more.
In the prosecution/criminal defense worlds, it is not uncommon for the average defendant to be out-reproducing the attorneys by 3:1, 4:1, or even higher ratios. The r/K divide is real.
More options
Context Copy link