Dead-vid Kill-iams
@davidw1457.bsky.social
190 followers
220 following
4K posts
I didn't do stuff you know about and you probably don't know me. But I'm mostly nice 🤷
#1 stan account for August (Hatchie's Version) apparently
Creator of a few bots that bring RSS feeds to Bsky (check my lists)
Posts
Media
Videos
Starter Packs
Pinned
Reposted by Dead-vid Kill-iams
Reposted by Dead-vid Kill-iams
Reposted by Dead-vid Kill-iams
Reposted by Dead-vid Kill-iams
Tuffy
@smtuffy.bsky.social
· 13h
Reuters
@reuters.com
· 13h
OpenAI to allow mature content on ChatGPT for adult verified users starting December
OpenAI will allow mature content for ChatGPT users who verify their age on the platform starting in December, CEO Sam Altman said, after the chatbot was made restrictive for users in mental distress.
reut.rs
Reposted by Dead-vid Kill-iams
Reposted by Dead-vid Kill-iams
Reposted by Dead-vid Kill-iams
Reposted by Dead-vid Kill-iams
![SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
JONATHAN LEE, ET AL. v. POUDRE
SCHOOL DISTRICT R–1
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
No. 25–89. Decided October 14, 2025
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Statement of JUSTICE ALITO, with whom JUSTICE
THOMAS and JUSTICE GORSUCH join, respecting the denial
of certiorari.
I concur in the denial of certiorari because petitioners do
not challenge the ground for the ruling below. But I remain
concerned that some federal courts are “tempt[ed]” to avoid
confronting a “particularly contentious constitutional questio[n]”: whether a school district violates parents’ fundamental rights “when, without parental knowledge or consent, it encourages a student to transition to a new gender
or assists in that process.” Parents Protecting Our Children, UA v. Eau Claire Area School Dist., 604 U. S. ___,
___–___ (2024) (ALITO, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari) (slip op., at 1–2) (citing Troxel v. Granville, 530 U. S.
57, 70 (2000) (plurality opinion)). Petitioners tell us that
nearly 6,000 public schools have policies—as respondent allegedly does—that purposefully interfere with parents’ access to critical information about their children’s genderidentity choices and school personnel’s involvement in and
influence on those choices. Pet. for Cert. 24. The troubling—and tragic—allegations in this case underscore the
“great and growing national importance” of the question
that these parent petitioners present. Parents Protecting
Our Children, 604 U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 1).](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreibznytltv7mexkfzlraxhxhcwvilqwad7bmgdmbtd643ln7wd375y@jpeg)
Reposted by Dead-vid Kill-iams
