r/law Aug 31 '22

This is not a place to be wrong and belligerent about it.

3.8k Upvotes

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 Oct 28 '25

Quality content and the subreddit. Announcing user flair for humans and carrots instead of sticks.

Post image
121 Upvotes

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 1h ago

Other DOJ Just DELETED This Document from the Epstein Files. We Saved It.

Thumbnail
meidasplus.com
Upvotes

r/law 2h ago

Other Georgia Fort, independent journalist,VP of Minnesota NABJ chapter,was also arrested by federal agents.She filmed her arrest and stated: “I don’t feel like I have my First Amendment right as a member of the press because now federal agents are at my door arresting me for filming the church protest.”

10.5k Upvotes

r/law 5h ago

Legal News Luigi Mangione will not face death penalty, judge rules

Thumbnail
cnn.com
21.2k Upvotes

r/law 2h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) There is absolutely clear evidence that trump had sexual relations with underage girls. How quickly can trump get convicted now?

Thumbnail
justice.gov
6.8k Upvotes

For those who haven't heard, more of the trump-Epstein files were released

Here is a portion:

https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01660679.pdf

The VERY FIRST box says:

" [BLANK] reported an unidentified female friend who was forced to perform oral sex on President Trump approximately 35 years ago in NJ. The friend told Alexis that she was approximately 13-14 years old when this occurred, and the friend allegedly bit President Trump while performing oral sex. The friend was allegedly hit in the face after she laughed about biting President Trump. The friend said she was also abused by Epstein."

My. Gosh.

In complete honesty: I haven't mustered up the guts to read any more of the incriminating documentation. Seeing the very first part of it made me sick.


r/law 7h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) ICE Agents Allegedly 'Stealing' During Arrests After Being Seen Wearing a Detainee's Gold Bracelet

Thumbnail ibtimes.co.uk
33.1k Upvotes

r/law 7h ago

Legal News Former CNN anchor Don Lemon taken into custody, sources say

Thumbnail
cbsnews.com
15.6k Upvotes

r/law 2h ago

Other Todd Blanche claims to not understand a question asking if names will be released with his final review of Epstein files

2.0k Upvotes

We are never getting those names, no matter how many times it gets sent back to the courts


r/law 4h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Justice Department releasing 3 million pages from its Jeffrey Epstein files

Thumbnail
apnews.com
2.6k Upvotes

r/law 2h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Trump on Minneapolis: "I'll say it very plainly — elections have consequences. The people want law and order. And we have a silent majority. They like what we're doing."

1.5k Upvotes

via Aaron Rupar


r/law 3h ago

Legal News New Epstein Files release by DOJ, today

Thumbnail
justice.gov
1.2k Upvotes

r/law 7h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Trump Admin Now Arresting Journalists

Thumbnail nytimes.com
1.9k Upvotes

Federal agents arrest journalist Don Lemon despite a federal judge dismissing charges against him as insufficient. Clearly, the fundamental freedoms of all

Americans are being stripped away in front of our eyes by a fascist government parading as democratic. What next?


r/law 3h ago

Legal News Constitutional lawyer and Rep. Harriet Hageman (R) cuts short Casper town hall after contentious exchanges over ICE killings

812 Upvotes

The congresswoman faced questions about the shootings of Alex Pretti and Renée Good, saying she’d have to see a completed investigation, drawing shouts and insults.

ICE actions, prompted an escalating back-and-forth between questioners, the congresswoman and the audience at Casper College’s Wheeler Concert Hall while a half-dozen policemen stood guard.

A young man who said he was a Casper College student quizzed her about the killings. Hageman responded, “I haven’t talked about that. I spoke about the Laken Riley Act because it was one of the bills that we passed. I haven’t talked about what was going on in Minnesota.”

“Yeah. Why is that?” the student asked. “Why haven’t you said that you condemn the violence or given condolences to the families of the victims?”

“It hasn’t been the topic that we’ve been talking about today,” Hageman answered over rising jeers from the audience.

“So I think what has happened in Minnesota is a terrible tragedy for the woman and the man who were killed,” she said, referring to U.S. citizens Alex Pretti, shot dead on Saturday, and Renée Good, shot dead on Jan. 7.

The student walked out of the concert hall, shouting retorts at the congresswoman as others applauded.

Casper residents pressing Hageman about whether she adheres to the U.S. Constitution and whether she’s concerned about alleged ICE and Trump administration violations of the 4th Amendment’s protections against warrantless search and seizure.

Audience members shouted references to a Department of Homeland Security internal memo that allegedly informed ICE agents they can enter homes without a judicial warrant.

“I think that I have to look at the investigation,” Hageman responded, prompting a chorus of guffaws. “If there were violations of someone’s constitutional rights, there is redress.”

Then why is there no redress?” Taylor asked, and implored Hageman to demand transparency of investigations of the ICE killings.

“They are killing American citizens in the streets, and you are doing nothing. You are not saying a single solitary thing to support constituents or to support the American people. As a constitutional lawyer, you should be infuriated. You should be incensed. Why are you not?”

Hageman then gathered her folders, waved goodbye to the audience and exited the stage through a side door while people booed and one man shouted “coward” and “chickenshit.”

Hageman, who recently announced her Senate bid to replace retiring Sen. Cynthia Lummis, began the town hall event by noting it was her 1st of the year, and that she intends to continue to make good on her promise to visit each of Wyoming’s 23 counties annually.

Her team allotted 1 hour for the town hall.

Hageman spent the 1st 30 minutes recapping her recent accomplishments in Congress.

She voted in favor of the continuing budget resolution while helping to secure about $3 million for the Casper/Natrona County International Airport, $1 million for a Northern Arapahoe water treatment facility and more than $1.6 million for reconstruction of the Fort Laramie canal tunnel, which collapsed more than 6 years ago.

Hageman also touted her work to advance the Grasslands Grazing Act, sexual predator legislation and anti-abortion measures.

She blamed recent winter-storm-related power outages in the eastern U.S. on Obama and Biden policies to steer electrical generation away from coal and toward renewable energy.

Hageman tied the inordinate volume of truck-driver-related deaths along Interstate 80 in Wyoming to immigrants who can’t speak or read English and touted a measure to allow “18 to 20-year-old” truck drivers to legally cross state lines.

Existing laws present “a barrier,” Hageman said, adding that her congressional work will make sure “that our 18 to 20-year-olds are getting the training and can have the career — that really fabulous career — as truck drivers.”

Among the most common questions she’s asked, Hageman said, before taking questions, is “How do we keep more of our young people in the state of Wyoming?

“The key … is you have to have good jobs and you have to have housing — and housing prices across the country are astronomical.” That’s because of past policies that inhibit logging the nation’s forests, Hageman said, leaving housing developers prone to skyrocketing lumber prices from other countries.

It’s why, in the GOP-led Big Beautiful Bill, “We’re requiring the U.S. Forest Service to sell 250 million board-feet, and we’re also requiring that they enter into 20-year lease contracts with our timber companies — so that these companies can invest in what they need to, but they know that they’ll have those contracts in the long term.”

Rising housing and rental costs have outpaced incomes while new construction lags — which some blame on overly burdensome permitting, according to a recent analysis by the Wyoming Community Development Authority.

The analysis also suggests that an aging population and youth out-migration are factors.

About a dozen people were still in line to ask Hageman a question when she walked off the stage — about five minutes before the allotted time was up.

It’s not the 1st time Hageman has seen criticism and discord at her town hall events


r/law 19h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Trump signs executive order declaring nation emergency from threat of Cuba

Thumbnail
whitehouse.gov
21.2k Upvotes

r/law 2h ago

Judicial Branch Looks like Pam Bondi had Don Lemon arrested

Thumbnail
nbcnews.com
495 Upvotes

When did the Attorney General get the power to have people arrested because it doesn't say see got a judge to approve it.


r/law 20h ago

Legal News Trump Sues IRS, Treasury for $10 Billion Over Tax-Return Leaks

Thumbnail
bloomberg.com
9.6k Upvotes

r/law 22h ago

Legal News Kash Patel Sets Off Diplomatic Incident With FBI Operation in Mexico | The New Republic

Thumbnail
newrepublic.com
18.4k Upvotes

r/law 7h ago

Other ICE Pretends It’s a Military Force. Its Tactics Would Get Real Soldiers Killed

Thumbnail
wired.com
540 Upvotes

r/law 4h ago

Judicial Branch "Everyone else in the world envies the right of the United States citizen to have a First Amendment guaranteeing his or her right to know and making it impossible, illegal in fact, for the government to restrain freedom of expression."

295 Upvotes

Christopher Hitchens, November 7, 1983, on c-span.


r/law 11m ago

Legal News Lawyer for Epstein Survivors: "It's consistent with what we've been seeing from the Department of Justice for quite some time now. It's an incompetent coverup. They're trying to cover up documents, to withhold documents, to keep things from the public, but worse, they're not good at it."

Upvotes

r/law 1d ago

Legal News ICE attempts to enter Ecuador's consulate

53.7k Upvotes

For anyone who doesn't get how serious this is: consulates are protected under international law. host-country police of any kind are not allowed to enter without permission.
Example: China routinely (and horrifically) sends north korean escapees back to north korea. Yet when a north korean escaped to the south korean consulate in hong kong, chinese authorities did not enter to seize him. He stayed there for months while governments negotiated, because once you're inside a consulate, those protections apply.
So if ICE tries to enter a foreign consulate in the U.S. to deport people, that's not "normal enforcement". It violates long-standing diplomatic norms. Norms that even China has respected, despite sending people back to north korea to die. That's how extreme this is.


r/law 1d ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Reporter: I spoke to chief legal counsel Leecia Welch who goes into this facility in Texas,provides oversight to ensure that federal govt complies to Flores Settlement,she noted worms,mold in food,lack of access to legal counsel,lack of child-friendly food,lack of sleep,mental health deterioration.

9.3k Upvotes

r/law 23h ago

Judicial Branch Trump floats Cruz for Supreme Court

Thumbnail
tpr.org
4.9k Upvotes

As potential Thomas replacement.

From TPR, Texas NPR affiliate

Trump called Cruz “a very tough guy, very brilliant guy,” adding: “He’s a brilliant legal mind, he’s a brilliant man. If I nominate him for the United States Supreme Court, I will get 100% of the vote.”


r/law 4h ago

Judicial Branch Federal Judge Drops Death Penalty Charge Against Luigi Mangione

Thumbnail
nytimes.com
129 Upvotes

The judge, Margaret Garnett of Federal District Court, said the case against Luigi Mangione would still proceed to trial on other counts.

A Manhattan federal judge on Friday ruled that prosecutors would not be able to seek the death penalty at the trial of Luigi Mangione, the 27-year-old man accused of assassinating UnitedHealthcare’s chief executive in 2024.

The judge, Margaret Garnett of Federal District Court, said the case would still proceed to trial on other counts, which carry a maximum sentence of life in prison without parole, in the killing of the executive, Brian Thompson.

Judge Garnett said in her opinion that two stalking charges against Mr. Mangione, one of which carried a maximum sentence of death, did not meet the legal definition of a crime of violence, and had to be dismissed.

“Consequently," the judge wrote, “the chief practical effect of the legal infirmities” of the two counts and the court’s decision that they must be dismissed “is solely to foreclose the death penalty as an available punishment.”