|
David Noll@david.noll.org |
Compare what section 1512(c) actually says with how Roberts describes it at the beginning of Fischer.
11 replies 30 reposts 113 likes
|
Screaming into the Void
@dlliebow.bsky.social
[ View ] |
This, THIS is the guy who should be interpreting every last federal regulation.
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
wallybuan0.bsky.social
@wallybuan0.bsky.social
[ View ] |
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Cynbel Terreus
@cynbelterreus.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I believe they literally fucking had another opinion out this year they fucking spelled out how " or otherwise" works. Definitely past cases. It's forcing language to mean what you want it to mean in plain language. Also what the fuck was Jackson doing in this god damn.
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Potomatic
@onbluskysku.bsky.social
[ View ] |
No presumption against redundancy anymore huh
0 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
|
bac5665
@bac5665.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I just can't. My brain can't process how bad this is.
0 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
|
Nikki Columbus
@nikkicolumbus.bsky.social
[ View ] |
“Otherwise” literally, etymologically, means “other way.” So, yeah, it extends the prohibition to anyone who in any OTHER WAY obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so.
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Blimple
@blimple.bsky.social
[ View ] |
If there is a history the Roberts Courts use if blatant dishonesty in its major rulings will be its defining feature. Gaslighting is their main writing skill
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
|
@jmlandau.bsky.social
[ View ] |
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master——that's all.”
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
uosdwis r dewoh
@thulcandrian.bsky.social
[ View ] |
By tossing out the meaning of language, I guess it can mean anything. RobertsGPT
1 replies 0 reposts 5 likes
|
No, like Chaucer
@wooble.geoffreyspear.com
[ View ] |
Do we need Congress to replace this entire section with about 20 sections reading like "Whoever corruptly impedes any official proceeding shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.", "Whoever corruptly influences any official proceeding...." etc etc etc?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Omri Marian
@omrimarian.bsky.social
[ View ] |
"or" - what does it even mean?
2 replies 1 reposts 19 likes