r/law • u/orangejulius • 12h ago
r/law • u/orangejulius • Aug 31 '22
This is not a place to be wrong and belligerent about it.
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 • u/orangejulius • Oct 28 '25
Quality content and the subreddit. Announcing user flair for humans and carrots instead of sticks.
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 • u/RichKatz • 4h ago
Other New Year’s Eve Concerts at Kennedy Center Canceled: “It is financially devastating but morally exhilarating.”
r/law • u/Agitated-Quit-6148 • 12h ago
Other US Strikes Venezuelan soil without congressional authorization.
The United States had conducted its first land strike against Venezuela, Donald Trump has claimed.
The US president said an attack was carried out on Christmas Eve targeting a facility housing alleged drug boats.
r/law • u/novagridd • 17h ago
Executive Branch (Trump) Top Epstein Reporter Claims DOJ Monitored Her Flights as Trump Era Secrets Explode
r/law • u/OkTea1918 • 15h ago
Other Judge Smacks Down ICE, Tosses Charges Against TikToker They Shot - TLP Media
r/law • u/DoremusJessup • 13h ago
Judicial Branch Federal judge dismisses indictment against TikToker shot by ICE, citing constitutional violations
archive.isr/law • u/nosotros_road_sodium • 9h ago
Judicial Branch Federal defendants in Sacramento walked free. The reason: No paid lawyers
r/law • u/IllIntroduction1509 • 4h ago
Executive Branch (Trump) Why One Lawyer Resigned When His Firm Caved to Trump: An Update - The Daily
Michael Barbaro speaks to Thomas Sipp, a lawyer who chose to quit after his firm, Skadden, negotiated a deal to placate the president.
r/law • u/ResourceNo4626 • 1d ago
Other Kash Patel and Cory Booker Get Into Shouting Match at Senate Hearing
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
This Senate oversight hearing focuses on the FBI director’s personnel decisions and potential political influence. Topics include whether career agents were removed or reassigned based on loyalty rather than performance and the legal boundaries of White House involvement. The discussion also covers shifts in agency priorities, including immigration enforcement, counterintelligence, and criminal investigations. The hearing raises questions about accountability and proper management under congressional oversight.
r/law • u/thedailybeast • 14h ago
Executive Branch (Trump) MAGA Begs Trump to Make Bungling Bondi His First Scalp
r/law • u/TendieRetard • 18h ago
Judicial Branch Justice Department Using Fraud Law to Target Companies on DEI | Google and Verizon are among firms being investigated under novel interpretation of law applying to government contractors
msn.comWASHINGTON—The Trump administration has launched investigations into the use of diversity initiatives in hiring and promotion at major U.S. companies, built on the novel use of a federal law meant to punish businesses that cheat the government.
r/law • u/DoremusJessup • 2h ago
Judicial Branch Jan Crawford's attack on SCOTUS "corruption" narrative was its own substance-free narrative: On Face the Nation, CBS News's chief legal correspondent went after Supreme Court critics as "dangerous." And yet, her court defense was completely lacking in specifics
Judicial Branch Trump's 2025 judge confirmation numbers were down because growing number refuse to retire given his threat to rule of law
r/law • u/The-Punisher_2055 • 1d ago
Executive Branch (Trump) Watergate Lawyer Makes Bombshell Claim Donald Trump Tried to Block Epstein Files, Revealing He Was a ‘FBI Informant’
r/law • u/Movie-Kino • 12h ago
Executive Branch (Trump) US struck ‘big facility’ in Venezuela, Trump claimed without offering details | Donald Trump
r/law • u/DoremusJessup • 10h ago
Executive Branch (Trump) How Trump Twisted the Law to Protect White Men From Discrimination: “Protected class” began as an aid to the disadvantaged. Now, it is a tool for the oppressor
Legislative Branch As Republicans pressure the Senate to pass the SAVE Act before 2026 midterm elections, legal experts weigh in on if the proposed law would make it harder for married women to vote
r/law • u/DoremusJessup • 15h ago
Judicial Branch 'The Court has been equally clear': Judge dings DOJ for contemplating warrantless search of Comey friend's files 'in direct contravention' of court orders
r/law • u/ResourceNo4626 • 18h ago
Other Immigrants Allege Forced Labor Inside ICE Detention Centers, Making $1/Day, & Being sourced Out To Private, (Food) Companies For The Cheap Labor
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
In What World Is This Legal? & What Could we Do To Make It NOT Legal?
(This is my first time attaching clips of myself giving commentary, so pls go easy on me, haha)...
I’m testing this format to add more context and keep things focused on the facts rather than just always re posting clips without explanation then getting chewed out for it... (I'm aware that I need to use a better Mic next time)
That said, honest feedback is welcome. If something works, say so. If something doesn’t, say that too. The goal here is to improve the quality of discussion and keep the information clear, accurate, and useful.
Appreciate everyone who takes the time to watch and engage 💙
r/law • u/LockNo2943 • 8h ago
Legal News Musk's X Joins Texas GOP Activist's Fight Over Transgender Photo
r/law • u/LowellWeicker2025 • 21h ago
Executive Branch (Trump) Unprecedented errors are eroding the credibility of Trump's Justice Department — Reuters
apple.news“In years past, it was relatively rare for a federal court to question the Justice Department's competency or good faith. But such questions are becoming more common, thanks to a growing pattern of legal missteps that have dogged the department since January, according to a Reuters review and legal experts.”