@delaware-lawyer.bsky.social
These shenanigans and the rigmarole have got to stop. Enough is enough.
If you don’t know what I’m talking about, you shouldn’t be owning a McDonald’s.
If you don’t know what I’m talking about, you shouldn’t be owning a McDonald’s.
November 18, 2025 at 5:16 PM
These shenanigans and the rigmarole have got to stop. Enough is enough.
If you don’t know what I’m talking about, you shouldn’t be owning a McDonald’s.
If you don’t know what I’m talking about, you shouldn’t be owning a McDonald’s.
I was assured that such a cave would not occur under Generalissimo Mamdani’s leadership. Zohran will NOT be pleased to hear of this insolence.
November 10, 2025 at 1:24 AM
I was assured that such a cave would not occur under Generalissimo Mamdani’s leadership. Zohran will NOT be pleased to hear of this insolence.
SCOTUS see blue wave
SCOTUS need to protect economy, ensure GOP can win in future
SCOTUS decide some tariffs illegal
PLOT TWIST: POTUS DGAF what SCOTUS says, and continues to burn everything down
Pic: SCOTUS’ reaction
SCOTUS need to protect economy, ensure GOP can win in future
SCOTUS decide some tariffs illegal
PLOT TWIST: POTUS DGAF what SCOTUS says, and continues to burn everything down
Pic: SCOTUS’ reaction
November 5, 2025 at 5:57 PM
SCOTUS see blue wave
SCOTUS need to protect economy, ensure GOP can win in future
SCOTUS decide some tariffs illegal
PLOT TWIST: POTUS DGAF what SCOTUS says, and continues to burn everything down
Pic: SCOTUS’ reaction
SCOTUS need to protect economy, ensure GOP can win in future
SCOTUS decide some tariffs illegal
PLOT TWIST: POTUS DGAF what SCOTUS says, and continues to burn everything down
Pic: SCOTUS’ reaction
Hey it’s me, your buddy. I no longer work for the CFTC, that was SOOOO long ago. I barely remember being a CFTC employee!
October 24, 2025 at 4:18 AM
Hey it’s me, your buddy. I no longer work for the CFTC, that was SOOOO long ago. I barely remember being a CFTC employee!
Curious to see if the output of an AI can be used to satisfy the pleading standard, RE Robby Starbuck.
I know he also alleged in person interactions, but if an AI output alone is enough to substantiate damages and intentionality of defamation—we’re so fucked.
I know he also alleged in person interactions, but if an AI output alone is enough to substantiate damages and intentionality of defamation—we’re so fucked.
October 23, 2025 at 9:34 PM
Curious to see if the output of an AI can be used to satisfy the pleading standard, RE Robby Starbuck.
I know he also alleged in person interactions, but if an AI output alone is enough to substantiate damages and intentionality of defamation—we’re so fucked.
I know he also alleged in person interactions, but if an AI output alone is enough to substantiate damages and intentionality of defamation—we’re so fucked.
Not to put too fine a point on it—but you also can’t unilaterally declare something “off the record” even if you say that beforehand.
You both have to be in agreement.
A meeting of the minds, as it were. Offer, acceptance. Mutual assent.
You both have to be in agreement.
A meeting of the minds, as it were. Offer, acceptance. Mutual assent.
October 21, 2025 at 2:19 PM
Not to put too fine a point on it—but you also can’t unilaterally declare something “off the record” even if you say that beforehand.
You both have to be in agreement.
A meeting of the minds, as it were. Offer, acceptance. Mutual assent.
You both have to be in agreement.
A meeting of the minds, as it were. Offer, acceptance. Mutual assent.
Pretty sure “274 agents” is just the number of J6 losers that turned face when they got caught and snitched on their fellow traitors, I.e. “informants”
Honestly seems low
Honestly seems low
October 13, 2025 at 2:50 AM
Pretty sure “274 agents” is just the number of J6 losers that turned face when they got caught and snitched on their fellow traitors, I.e. “informants”
Honestly seems low
Honestly seems low
I would like to nominate Justice Jackson for the reverse Taft (with a back-twist). SCOTUS to POTUS then back to SCOTUS.
October 5, 2025 at 2:28 PM
I would like to nominate Justice Jackson for the reverse Taft (with a back-twist). SCOTUS to POTUS then back to SCOTUS.
The text of the second amendment is a lot more protective of “states can have and control their own national guards” than it is “every man woman and child gets one.”
And yet, not seeing any 2A fanatics out here screeching about the presidents nationalizing state guards against the state’s will.
And yet, not seeing any 2A fanatics out here screeching about the presidents nationalizing state guards against the state’s will.
October 5, 2025 at 12:32 PM
The text of the second amendment is a lot more protective of “states can have and control their own national guards” than it is “every man woman and child gets one.”
And yet, not seeing any 2A fanatics out here screeching about the presidents nationalizing state guards against the state’s will.
And yet, not seeing any 2A fanatics out here screeching about the presidents nationalizing state guards against the state’s will.
As apocryphal as the claims are, I still see orange carrots as a symbol of European monarchy.
To that end, it is the duty of every American to reject the orange root, and consume only non-orange carrots (purple and whatnot).
No kings means no kings, even in stews
To that end, it is the duty of every American to reject the orange root, and consume only non-orange carrots (purple and whatnot).
No kings means no kings, even in stews
October 3, 2025 at 1:45 PM
As apocryphal as the claims are, I still see orange carrots as a symbol of European monarchy.
To that end, it is the duty of every American to reject the orange root, and consume only non-orange carrots (purple and whatnot).
No kings means no kings, even in stews
To that end, it is the duty of every American to reject the orange root, and consume only non-orange carrots (purple and whatnot).
No kings means no kings, even in stews
New add-ons to the roster for the Third Founding’s key first amendment cases:
Kimmel v. Carr
IceBlock v. Bondi
More to come, I’m sure!
Kimmel v. Carr
IceBlock v. Bondi
More to come, I’m sure!
October 3, 2025 at 1:34 PM
New add-ons to the roster for the Third Founding’s key first amendment cases:
Kimmel v. Carr
IceBlock v. Bondi
More to come, I’m sure!
Kimmel v. Carr
IceBlock v. Bondi
More to come, I’m sure!
Shutting down your own government is associated with cowardly desperados, and the despised Ku Klux Klan.
The GOP lacks honor.
The GOP lacks honor.
October 1, 2025 at 6:42 PM
Shutting down your own government is associated with cowardly desperados, and the despised Ku Klux Klan.
The GOP lacks honor.
The GOP lacks honor.
Knowing how petty these guys can be, I’m betting we see Marines in masks by week’s end.
October 1, 2025 at 2:54 AM
Knowing how petty these guys can be, I’m betting we see Marines in masks by week’s end.
What if it was actually an escalator moving straight towards the assassins, and the only way to save the President was to stop it
September 24, 2025 at 4:04 AM
What if it was actually an escalator moving straight towards the assassins, and the only way to save the President was to stop it
Just really curious on one point with MAHA: when was America healthy? Like what specific date is their benchmark for “going back” to?
September 19, 2025 at 2:32 PM
Just really curious on one point with MAHA: when was America healthy? Like what specific date is their benchmark for “going back” to?
Thinking about this one a lot lately. The ideological precursors to RFK Jr.’s current anti-vax crusade were such pieces of shit from the very start. And the movement has only gotten worse since.
Vaccines and Autism: A Measured Response
YouTube video by hbomberguy
m.youtube.com
September 18, 2025 at 6:43 PM
Thinking about this one a lot lately. The ideological precursors to RFK Jr.’s current anti-vax crusade were such pieces of shit from the very start. And the movement has only gotten worse since.
Reposted
The WaPo’s law and politics columnist doesn’t understand that Murthy was a standing ruling— a decision fundamentally about states trying to intervene on behalf of alleged jawboning victims with a handful of individual plaintiffs thrown in as an afterthought— and ignores Vullo entirely.
Yikes.
Yikes.
September 18, 2025 at 10:49 AM
The WaPo’s law and politics columnist doesn’t understand that Murthy was a standing ruling— a decision fundamentally about states trying to intervene on behalf of alleged jawboning victims with a handful of individual plaintiffs thrown in as an afterthought— and ignores Vullo entirely.
Yikes.
Yikes.
Looking forward to Kimmel v. Carr sailing through the District and Circuit courts as obviously stating a claim under the first amendment.
Further excited to see how SCOTUS comes up with a bespoke exception to the first amendment for disrespecting Trump’s allies.
Further excited to see how SCOTUS comes up with a bespoke exception to the first amendment for disrespecting Trump’s allies.
September 18, 2025 at 12:57 AM
Looking forward to Kimmel v. Carr sailing through the District and Circuit courts as obviously stating a claim under the first amendment.
Further excited to see how SCOTUS comes up with a bespoke exception to the first amendment for disrespecting Trump’s allies.
Further excited to see how SCOTUS comes up with a bespoke exception to the first amendment for disrespecting Trump’s allies.
Stagflation inbound.
I bet the rate cut gives the White House the go-ahead to stop serial delays on tariffs, so we’ll start seeing accelerating inflation, while little has changed to reverse the trends in the labor market.
Nobody I know gets a raise because rates dropped, and rent’s still due.
I bet the rate cut gives the White House the go-ahead to stop serial delays on tariffs, so we’ll start seeing accelerating inflation, while little has changed to reverse the trends in the labor market.
Nobody I know gets a raise because rates dropped, and rent’s still due.
September 17, 2025 at 6:21 PM
Stagflation inbound.
I bet the rate cut gives the White House the go-ahead to stop serial delays on tariffs, so we’ll start seeing accelerating inflation, while little has changed to reverse the trends in the labor market.
Nobody I know gets a raise because rates dropped, and rent’s still due.
I bet the rate cut gives the White House the go-ahead to stop serial delays on tariffs, so we’ll start seeing accelerating inflation, while little has changed to reverse the trends in the labor market.
Nobody I know gets a raise because rates dropped, and rent’s still due.
If NYT settles with trump, I will cancel my NYT cooking subscription LIKE THAT.
Start printing out your core recipes folks, you never know when you’ll need to cut yourself off to make a point.
Start printing out your core recipes folks, you never know when you’ll need to cut yourself off to make a point.
September 16, 2025 at 8:42 PM
If NYT settles with trump, I will cancel my NYT cooking subscription LIKE THAT.
Start printing out your core recipes folks, you never know when you’ll need to cut yourself off to make a point.
Start printing out your core recipes folks, you never know when you’ll need to cut yourself off to make a point.
Why is Labor Day the “mattresses are on sale” holiday?
Is it somehow some kind of anti-union message? Is it pro-union?
Other holidays I could get—mattress sale on Valentine’s Day would be a gag. Mattress sale on New Year’s Day would make sense—new year, get a new bed.
But why Labor Day?
Is it somehow some kind of anti-union message? Is it pro-union?
Other holidays I could get—mattress sale on Valentine’s Day would be a gag. Mattress sale on New Year’s Day would make sense—new year, get a new bed.
But why Labor Day?
September 1, 2025 at 12:30 AM
Why is Labor Day the “mattresses are on sale” holiday?
Is it somehow some kind of anti-union message? Is it pro-union?
Other holidays I could get—mattress sale on Valentine’s Day would be a gag. Mattress sale on New Year’s Day would make sense—new year, get a new bed.
But why Labor Day?
Is it somehow some kind of anti-union message? Is it pro-union?
Other holidays I could get—mattress sale on Valentine’s Day would be a gag. Mattress sale on New Year’s Day would make sense—new year, get a new bed.
But why Labor Day?
Overturn Whren v United States. Gobbledygook nonsense to give constitutional protection to searches and seizures that are genuinely pretextual.
August 21, 2025 at 7:24 PM
Overturn Whren v United States. Gobbledygook nonsense to give constitutional protection to searches and seizures that are genuinely pretextual.