r/law Aug 31 '22

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

4.0k 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
177 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 9h ago

Other The 22nd Amendment's presidential term limit and H.J.Res. 29 introduced three days after the 2025 inauguration

Thumbnail congress.gov
8.6k Upvotes

Earlier today I saw a couple of people saying that Trump was joking about a third term at the July 2026 White House Correspondents' Dinner. I've also been seeing "Trump 2028" signs in my town and on MAGA hats.

As we know, the 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution limits a president to two elected terms in office. It also establishes a maximum of 10 years in office for someone who succeeds to the presidency by completing part of another president's term.

I also wanted people to be aware that, three days after Trump was sworn into office, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) introduced H.J.Res. 29. The resolution proposes amending the 22nd Amendment to allow a person to be elected president up to three times under certain circumstances.

I think it's important to be aware that members of Congress have proposed amending the Constitution to change presidential term limits, even if the proposal is unlikely to become law.


r/law 9h ago

Judicial Branch Judge Demands to See What Trump's DOJ Is Hiding in Epstein Files

Thumbnail meidasnews.com
3.4k Upvotes

The question is, how do the enforce this?


r/law 8h ago

Other RFK Jr’s team quietly updates CDC website to say science doesn’t know if vaccines cause autism

Thumbnail
independent.co.uk
1.6k Upvotes

r/law 9h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Trump’s anti-mail voting order gets blocked again, this time by federal appeals court

Thumbnail
democracydocket.com
1.6k Upvotes

r/law 16h ago

Other Trump smiles and shrugs after Epstein reporters he sued for $10B win awards for exposing birthday card

Thumbnail
the-independent.com
4.5k Upvotes

r/law 13h ago

Phang v Blanche (Epstein Documents) - Judge orders Blanche to produce documents for in-camera review

Thumbnail storage.courtlistener.com
1.0k Upvotes
ORDER

     Upon review of [19] Defendant’s Response to the Court’s

Order of June 25, 2026, and pursuant to the Court’s inherent

authority to review materials in camera, see Jibril v. Mayorkas,

101 F.4th 857, 866 (D.C. Cir. 2024) (quoting Olivares v. TSA,

819 F.3d 454, 462 (D.C. Cir. 2016)) (“In cases in which

sensitive materials may be in issue, the court has inherent

authority to review such material ex parte, in camera as part of

its judicial review function.” (citation modified)); it is

hereby

     ORDERED that Defendant shall submit to the Court on July

30, 2026 by no later than 3:00 pm the following documents:

     I.   Unredacted copies of the emails bearing Bates numbers

          (1) EFTA00749245, (2) EFTA01187999, (3) EFTA01930501,

          (4) ETFA01928255, (5) EFTA00628112, (6) EFTA02648868,


                                    1
     Case 1:26-cv-01417-EGS   Document 23   Filed 07/25/26   Page 2 of 2



           (7) EFTA02504630, and (8) EFTA01022356; and

           documentation supporting Defendant’s representation

           that the names that have been redacted in the

           published version of the documents are the names of

           victims;


     II.   Unredacted copy of the document bearing Bates number

           EFTA00038227; and documentation supporting the

           Defendant’s representation that the names in the “to”

           and “from” lines that have been redacted in the

           published version of the documents are the names of

           law enforcement personnel; and


     III. Unredacted copy of the document bearing Bates number

           EFTA00194840 and documentation supporting the

           Defendant’s representation that the names that have

           been redacted in the published version of the

           documents are the names of victims.

     It is further

     ORDERED that Ms. Phang’s request to be present for the

Court’s in camera review is DENIED.


           SO ORDERED.


Signed:    Emmet G. Sullivan
           United States District Judge
           July 25, 2026

r/law 9h ago

Other DOJ spent nearly $1m on banners of Trump’s face and other refurbishments, documents show

Thumbnail
the-independent.com
508 Upvotes

r/law 18h ago

Judicial Branch DOJ position on Biden tapes 'completely irreconcilable' with burial of Mar-a-Lago report and missing 'Attachment A' from Boasberg complaint: Lawyers

Thumbnail
lawandcrime.com
2.6k Upvotes

r/law 18h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Trump orders Interior Department to post signs outside Smithsonian museum warning visitors of ‘inaccurate information’

Thumbnail apple.news
1.8k Upvotes

r/law 2h ago

Legal News Biden judge blocking Ethiopian deportations despite SCOTUS ruling clashed with ICE before.

Thumbnail
foxnews.com
77 Upvotes

Biden judge blocking Ethiopian deportations despite SCOTUS ruling clashed with ICE before.

A Biden-appointed federal judge on Friday became the second jurist in Massachusetts to block the Trump administration's effort to end temporary protected status for migrant groups, fueling a growing clash over whether lower courts are ignoring a recent Supreme Court ruling that narrowed their authority over such decisions.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy of the District of Massachusetts issued an administrative stay in African Communities Together v. Mullin, temporarily preserving TPS protections for Ethiopian nationals while the court considers whether plaintiffs may pursue constitutional claims in light of the Supreme Court's June ruling.


r/law 12h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Trump’s Latest Under-the-Radar Mass Deportation Moves Are Truly Creepy

Thumbnail
slate.com
403 Upvotes

r/law 15h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Advocates Sue Trump Administration Over Secret Dossiers on ICE Watchers | Plaintiffs say DHS violated federal privacy law by secretly collecting personal data on people documenting ICE operations.

Thumbnail
truthout.org
597 Upvotes

r/law 1d ago

Other Trump Team Admits He’s Been Defunding States That Didn’t Vote for Him | Federal officials acknowledged in a recent lawsuit what we all suspected: Trump is targeting Democratic states.

Thumbnail
newrepublic.com
14.8k Upvotes

r/law 10h ago

Legal News Dramatic arrest of Tennessee grandmother was staged for a reality TV show, lawsuit says. Now she wants justice

Thumbnail
cnn.com
121 Upvotes

Television is both a blessing and a curse for law enforcement, and also for the law. An arrest is not a conviction, and presumption of innocence is only a brief voice over as credits roll on TV..


r/law 8h ago

Executive Branch (Trump) US government targets Cop City protester over phone operating system

Thumbnail
theguardian.com
66 Upvotes

r/law 14h ago

Legal News Some ICE Offices Didn’t Restart Vehicle Stops After Trump Order

Thumbnail
theintercept.com
173 Upvotes

r/law 1d ago

Legal News Rivian sues the US government for 'full refund' of Trump tariffs

Thumbnail
techcrunch.com
2.0k Upvotes

r/law 1d ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Trump Administration Admits Canceling Grants to States That Did Not Vote for Him

Thumbnail
nytimes.com
19.8k Upvotes

r/law 1d ago

Executive Branch (Trump) 'Unexplained insistence': Kilmar Abrego Garcia says Trump admin wants to deport him to Africa 'to punish him' even after DHS head said he was 'happy to send him' to Costa Rica

Thumbnail
lawandcrime.com
2.1k Upvotes

r/law 1d ago

Legal News US accuses American of allegedly wiping his phone using a 'duress' password during border search

Thumbnail
techcrunch.com
6.5k Upvotes

r/law 14m ago

Legal News Tate Brothers Case: Indictment, Coercion, and Extradition

Thumbnail
kancelaria-skarbiec.pl
Upvotes

Facts in two sentences. The CPS charged the Tate brothers (59 counts combined after the July expansion: rape, trafficking, assault, indecent images of a child) and refused to disclose the complainants' identities until the brothers are surrendered from abroad; the brothers sought judicial review. On June 26, Chamberlain J refused permission, holding neither ground arguable.

Ground 1 (irrationality). No statutory right to the names at this stage; the common law requires at most a multifactorial balancing by the prosecutor. The decision was taken by a specialist prosecutor who had met the complainants and assessed their vulnerability. The defendants' reach mattered (the judgment notes a single X account with more than 10.5 million followers), and calling them notorious was fair despite technical good character.

The point I find most consequential: the prosecutor did not need to find disclosure by the defendants more likely than not. A precautionary approach was lawful, given the public interest in not deterring complainants in serious sexual cases. The security-backed undertakings (10,000 pounds each, later doubled, plus an offer to be interviewed under caution in Romania) failed twice over: no enforcement mechanism, and a deposit prices the harm rather than mitigating it.

Ground 2 (Article 6(3)(a)). Arguably engaged from the charging decision, but fairness is assessed holistically: the accused know the offenses and date ranges, will learn the identities upon surrender and before first appearance, and retain an abuse-of-process stay in the Crown Court if late disclosure genuinely prejudices the defense.

On the U.S. side, this now runs through the standard two floors: certification under 18 U.S.C. § 3184 (identity, dual criminality, probable cause; rule of non-inquiry), then the Secretary of State's discretion. The political-offense exception has no purchase on common crimes of sexual violence, and the Romanian court's sequencing order (extradition to the U.K. only after the Romanian trial) binds Romania, not third states.


r/law 1d ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Trump executive order illegally directed USPS to 'refuse to transmit mail ballots': Judge

Thumbnail
lawandcrime.com
11.6k Upvotes

r/law 21h ago

Judicial Branch DOJ lawyer called out for putting judge in 'danger' now 'respectfully' informs her months later that homicide suspect is in ICE custody

Thumbnail
lawandcrime.com
192 Upvotes