site banner
PaperclipPerfector  7hr ago (text post)   187 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for August 8, 2025

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Court opinion:

  • A person is being investigated. Twelve minutes into a "custodial" (at the police station) interview (with Miranda rights having been read to the suspect), the following exchange takes place.

Suspect: Would I be able to call my lawyer?

Detective 1: You can, yeah.

Suspect: I got, uh, Lou Savino.

Detective 1: Do you want to continue this interview or what do you want to do?

Suspect: I want to continue it but I want my lawyer present.

Detective 1: Ok. So then we have to end the interview.

Suspect: You have to end the interview?

Detective 1: Mmm hmm. If you want your lawyer here, we have to end the interview.

Suspect: Will he be here today or no?

Detective 1: Probably not. Lou Savino is a very busy man.

Suspect: Yeah, I called him this morning before I left Delaware.

Detective 1: If you want him here, we’ll end the interview.

Suspect: You can keep it going.

Detective 1: Are you sure you want to do this without a lawyer?

Suspect: Yeah, because I got the right to remain silent, right?

Detective 2: Sure.

The interview then continues.

  • Several months later, the suspect is charged with various crimes. However, the trial judge suppresses all statements made by the defendant after the exchange recounted above, and the appeals panel affirms. According to the federal supreme court, once a suspect in police custody has requested a lawyer, he is not allowed to revoke that request until either he gets a lawyer or he leaves police custody and then initiates a new contact with the police. After the then-suspect said "I want my lawyer present", the detective should have ended the interview immediately, or at least should have disregarded the then-suspect's later statement of "you can keep it going".

Court opinion:

  • In year 2021, the mayor of Philadelphia issues an executive order (1) declaring Juneteenth a city holiday and (2) renaming Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples' Day. A coalition of Italian-American organizations promptly sues, alleging that this executive order not only is the latest in a string of anti-Italian discriminatory actions perpetrated by the mayor, but also is a usurpation of the city council's exclusive power to declare city holidays.

  • In year 2023, the trial court rejects the coalition's arguments. The city charter grants the power of establishing holidays to the city personnel director, who is a member of the executive branch under the mayor.

  • In year 2025, the appeals panel reverses. The city charter grants to the city personnel director, not the power of establishing holidays, but merely the power of establishing employment regulations regarding holidays. The power of establishing holidays is not explicitly mentioned anywhere in the charter, so by default, in accordance with state and federal practice, it inheres in the legislative body—the council. Therefore, this executive order is a usurpation of legislative power. (This analysis applies to substantive holidays that are days off for city workers. The mayor still may declare temporary, symbolic holidays that have no effect on anybody.)

In year 2025, the appeals panel reverses. The city charter grants to the city personnel director, not the power of establishing holidays, but merely the power of establishing employment regulations regarding holidays. The power of establishing holidays is not explicitly mentioned anywhere in the charter, so by default, in accordance with state and federal practice, it inheres in the legislative body—the council. Therefore, this executive order is a usurpation of legislative power. (This analysis applies to substantive holidays that are days off for city workers. The mayor still may declare temporary, symbolic holidays that have no effect on anybody.)

Somewhat similar to the history of MLK Day in Arizona.

In 1983, then-president Ronald Reagan signed the bill that made Martin Luther King Jr. Day a federal holiday, the first to commemorate the life of an African American, according to the U.S. Senate website. Three years later, the Arizona House of Representatives created a bill to recognize the holiday. One vote defeated the bill, but nine days later, Gov. Bruce Babbitt issued an executive order to create a paid MLK holiday.

Subsequent governor Mecham gained national attention several days after his inauguration by fulfilling a campaign promise to cancel a paid Martin Luther King, Jr. Day holiday (MLK Day) for state employees. The holiday had been created in May 1986 by executive order from the previous governor, Bruce Babbitt, after the state legislature had voted not to create the holiday. Following the creation of the holiday, the state Attorney General's office issued an opinion that the paid holiday was illegal and threatened to sue the incoming governor over the cost of the paid holiday, as it had not been approved by the legislature. Despite the issues of the legality of how the holiday was created, Mecham replied to comments from civil rights activists and the Black community after the cancellation by saying "King doesn't deserve a holiday."

The decision turned to the voters in 1990, when two separate ballot measures for a Martin Luther King Jr. Day holiday were put on the state ballot, according to the Pima County Public Library. Both measures failed to pass, once again drawing outrage and boycotts against Arizona. Notably, the National Football League stripped the state of its right to host the 1993 Super Bowl. Musicians refused to perform in Arizona.

The loss denied Phoenix a projected $200 million in revenue. An agreement was made that Arizona would host the 1996 Super Bowl, with the condition it passed a referendum to celebrate the holiday.

The holiday was finally inked into state law in November 1992. Voters passed a Martin Luther King Civil Rights Day holiday, making Arizona the last state to formally install an MLK holiday

At the close of the hearing, the suppression court granted the motion to suppress the statements Stevens-Reddy made after he invoked his right to counsel. It found that his invocation of the right to counsel was clear and unequivocal; his words after Detective Gallagher told him his attorney would be unavailable were equivocal; and his interaction with detectives after he asked for an attorney and was not re-Mirandized “may have been voluntary, but it certainly was not knowing and it was not an intelligent waiver. ”

Too retarded to understand his rights, courts give him a mulligan anyways.

If I were the mods I'd punish darkly hinting harsher than whatever it is you are afraid of being banned for.

Fair

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats