Guy Hamilton-Smith

My son doesn’t eat fish. Any alternative? Replace him with a cat. Cats love fish.

Do Legal Checks on a President’s Power “Diminish the Votes of the Citizens Who Elected Him”? The administration is arguing that when courts restrain Donald Trump’s actions in the name of the law, they “diminish the votes of the citizens who elected him” as a “representative of the people” wie...

Just out from me at Cato: in its case against Maryland federal judges, the Trump administration is advancing the dangerous and open-ended argument that legal checks on a president's actions "diminish the votes of the citizens who elected him." Whoa! /1

DOJ Removes All Mentions Of Justice From Website

DOJ Removes All Mentions Of Justice From Website theonion.com/doj-rem...

That criminal defense attorney feeling when you discovered the police did a little bit of light perjury

Watchdog Group Downgrades U.S. From Democracy To Whatever Political System Lobsters Have

Watchdog Group Downgrades U.S. From Democracy To Whatever Political System Lobsters Have theonion.com/watchdo...

Stanford Three Strikes Project wins relief for man serving 185 years to life sentence. He was released after serving 30 years in prison for nonviolent street crimes.

Patient, sobbing: But Doctor, I AM Pagliacci!
ChatGPT: Apologies. I didn't realise when recommending Pagliacci's epic show to cure your depression that you were the genius himself. I'm impressed! With regards to your initial question, I can recommend seeing the Great Clown Pagliacci.

NEW: We’re appealing the dismissal of our case against the Federal Bureau of Prisons for unlawfully incarcerating people longer than the law allows under the First Step Act.

People have a right to be released from prison after they've earned time off of their sentences.

I'm working on an appellate brief that relies heavily on scientific evidence, and I think is an important civil rights issue, yet part of me feels...what's the point? What's the point of evidence if it's just calvinball and politics?

They fixed it. Apparently it was a coding error. That only targeted those parts of the constitution that POTUS and friends have mused about suspending. Coincidence I'm betting.

???

I think it was explained as a coding error. Probably just coincidental that the coding error only impacted those portions of the Constitution POTUS and friends have openly mused about suspending.

Suddenly, it is this man's time to shine.

Big chunks of the Constitution are missing from the official site. Notably, habeas. Orwell would think this is a bit too on the nose.

constitution.congress.gov/constitution/

Inspired

Alex on twitter writes: "Someone on Twitter writes: "You’re a menswear writer. You don’t know anything about manufacturing in America, or steel mills, or metallurgy, or CNC machining, or how anything is produced from raw material into a finished product in this country or anywhere. Stick to writing about “men’s fashion."" I reply: "i actually had a career in knifemaking before this. the reason why you can't avoid tariffs in knifemaking is because everyone relies on Gobelin machinery. are you aware of this?" Alex replies: "Gobelin machinery? What exactly are you referring to?" I reply: "you Gobelin DEEZ NUTS!"

"stick to menswear"

Well, we certainly agree there

Litigating Sex Offender Stuff in the Golden Age of Epstein Or, Bailing Out the Ocean With a Leaky Bucket

I wrote some thoughts about Epstein, politics, and law as it relates to sex offense policy

littlereddots.substack.com/p/litigating...

I'm less sure that's a left-right thing, more of a human thing, or maybe a modern terminally online human thing.

well, in this context, I'm referring to criminal punishment, not that it isn't without its problems.

But, at least you get a lawyer and appeal rights.

I also think the carceral systems are more honest. Abolitionism dresses up punitive sentiment as accountability, but it's the same thing.

At least the carceral folks give you a lawyer.

The abolitionist idea that banishment and exile for even alleged wrongs is somehow better than the systems that we have in place now is kind of funny, given that (1) it's not much different from carceral systems with (2) even fewer protections for people accused.

I guess I'd question whether it's non-carceral -- it's more or less the same result: banishment. But without the niceties that the Constitution provides. Thus, bad actors are free to game that system to their heart's content.

Arguing for a less punitive criminal justice system mostly feels like bailing out the ocean with a leaky bucket.

These programs aren't supposed to be punishment, and yet if your indefinite imprisonment in one of them is solely contingent on a conviction...kind of gives up the game?

Quite the story-within-a-story about New Jersey's STU, and indefinite pre-crime detention more generally for people convicted of sex-related offenses. His "dangerousness" was keyed to his conviction, not something inherent about his mental state.

www.nytimes.com/2025/08/01/n...

Genuine q: what happens when ICE keeps doing this? Can’t get at them with Bivens, and 4a violations aren’t a defense in removal, so…cool ruling?

Can’t believe we’re just six months in. This place is going to be unrecognizable in three years at this rate.

I need someone to show up six hours later and tell me there’s nothing they can do though.