No joke, this is how years of Ancestry.com memberships are going to pay off for my family.
@jamesftierney
Associate dean for academic affairs and Associate professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law (Illinois Tech). I study financial markets regulation & law of capitalism. But this β IIT. DSA Fund board πΉπ€, Rstats, NLP, Phish dad, etc. Semper ubi sub ubi.
No joke, this is how years of Ancestry.com memberships are going to pay off for my family.
Miss me with the geriatrics complaining about having to defend their seats when theyβre clearly not meeting the moment. No patience for this shit. www.axios.com/2026/03/06/h...
Fugazi/albini
Well look at this: Fugazi is releasing the sessions they did with Steve Albini. The band junked the work and re-recorded what would become In on the Killtaker. Very curious to hear this artifact.
DEMOCRATIC BACKSLIDING AND THE LIMITS OF FIRST AMENDMENT LEGALISM 17 U.C. IRVINE L. REV. ___ (forthcoming) Jacob M. Schriner-Briggs* The second Trump administration has unleashed a wave of repressive activity targeting civil societyβs most prominent institutions: news media, universities, law firms, and more. Political scientists have responded to these episodes with warnings of βdemocratic backslidingβ while legal scholars invoke the same phenomena as proof that the freedom of speech is in βcrisis.β This Article begins by bridging these diagnoses, arguing that the United Statesβs crisis of free speech is best understood as but one important dimension of its ongoing crisis of democracy. Given this understanding, the Articleβs primary contribution is to assess whether the First Amendment, interpreted and implemented by courts, can secure free speech against an executive branch intent on suppressing it. While the First Amendment has supported important rulings against the administration, the Articleβs basic conclusion is that reformers seeking to unwind the speech crisis must ultimately look beyond it. Though First Amendment doctrine can slow down an overtly censorious government, it suffers from major blind spots the second Trump administration has routinely exploited. Moreover, even when litigants are able to press First Amendment claims, the administration has engaged in βlegalistic noncompliance,β strategies that frustrate lower court proceedings and which have frequently been countenanced by the Roberts Court. The legalism of doctrine and courts can serve speech-protective functions. Yet the crisis at hand, itself downstream from an anti-democratic politics, must be met with responses forged through democratic processes and implemented by democratic institutions. The best long-term hopes for free speech, in other words, lie more in democratic politics than constitutional law.
"Democratic Backsliding and the Limits of First Amendment Legalism" is forthcoming in the U.C. Irvine Law Review. I hope to have it SSRN-ready by the end of April. If you'd like to take a look beforehand, let me know. Comments welcome!
Oh nice the thing I worry about every single time I walk across a city grate happened.
Unfortunately, βYo brother, legal team confirmed we canβt work with minors rnβ is an instant classic
Brb asking Claude code to set up this model
This is a monkeys paw idea
FT comments section this morning - saying what everyone else is thinking, right?
When I get the Chicago Tribuneβs Daywatch newsletter by email I start hearing the Baywatch theme song
OK, I've seen enough.
I suggest that anyone interested in the sharp comments I've had about some of the anti-LPE movement pieces in the UChicago LR to simply read and compare the pieces by LPE scholars to those of their critics. It's astonishing.
Go here: lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archiv...
The anti LPE pieces are so laughably bad that you have to wonder whether the editors were secretly stacking the deck against the L&E position.
wait wait WHAT? Apparently a "medical journal" in canada has been publishing fictionalized case reports for decades without indicating to its readers that they were fictionalized... retractionwatch.com/2026/03/03/c...
Ah, yes, the invaluable wisdom of the markets.
this is not an amount of money any individual or household should be able to have and we have to abolish both billionaires as a group and the economic system that makes them possible
Some even have allergies.
Do none of you typeset your briefs in LaTeX?
*ducks*
Glad it works for you because phew the manual periods would wreck me
Your lawyering work, essential as it is, is sometimes inscrutable
Can you say why you think this is a good use of a prediction market when vote counts arenβt yet available? Isnβt it betting based on vibes?
My wife and kids have more immediate ancestry by descent so they go first.
Again, looking forward to being part of a new diaspora
Love this FT graphic on Strait of Hormuz flow.
(Note: likely understates flow because this will not capture tankers who are making the run with their transponders turned offβand, tbh, if I was making the run I wouldn't want my transponder on)
I dictate email responses while driving, walking to the train, walking the dog, etc.
Would you believe if I told you the deanβs email job was maybe even worse?
incredible, he did the joke
Every community has its horrors, unfortunately. I grew up in Boston, which among other things did not have a more enlightened history of harbor prison camps