Luke Smith Morgan

Four points for good-faith effort, fifth point for above-and-beyond, which depends on the assignment.

The Political Economy of the US Media System: Excavating the Roots of the Present Crisis - Roosevelt Institute Bilal Baydoun, Shahrzad Shams, and Victor Pickard trace the roots of the US media crisis to decades of deregulation and commercial capture, outlining how consolidation, news deserts, and platform domi...

Thrilled to announce the publication of our @rooseveltinstitute.org report that uncovers the policy roots of the current crises facing our news, information & communication systems. We argue that media reform must become central to a US pro-democracy movement. rooseveltinstitute.org/publications...

That's absolutely right

My approach has been to make the formative assessments 4/5 points for completion; emphasize that the point is to practice & they're not going to be able to rely on AI for the final, so using AI will at most get them 1 extra point at cost of practice; and certify they didn't use. Has worked well IMO

In addition to me-graded formative assessments, I point my students to tons of past exams posted online and tell them that Gemini can check their work to a reasonably correct enough degree that it is well worth their time to do it

🌟 Call for papers 🌟

'How is the earth written, by whom and to what ends? And how is it written through law? What distinguishes the planetary, the global & the international—and how might these distinctions matter legally?'

Join us in Florence in June!
@eui-eu.bsky.social @uoelawschool.bsky.social

Like at the point where an LLM is easily in the top 10% of the curve on a difficult 1L issue spotter, I'm not sure what to do with the argument that they're "not reasoning."

All that said I'm fully sympathetic to the argument that rule 11 requires human/lawyer contemplation of every word filed

There's strong evidence that they can generalize (e.g. training on chess makes them better at non-chess tasks) & IME they're v good at sophisticated analysis of totally novel (even abstract) text.

Well tbf what I was concerned with was that the citation was just to another opinion, although I didn't run that one down to see what's at the bottom of the pile of turtles.

Re: capabilities, I think distinction is mechanism—LLMs *are* next word predictors—and process.

Online Sports Betting Taxes, 2025 Legal sports betting has grown rapidly since the Supreme Court granted states the ability to establish online sports betting markets.

There are industry specific tax rates, and part of the reason that states have been tripping over themselves to legalize is because they can (and do) tax the hell out of it (like with legal weed)

(stares directly into camera)

for the true freaks (like me) who are interested in things like the kinds of facts judges find from evidence vs those they feel comfortable just asserting, I don't love "LLMs are just next word prediction engines"—hardly uncontested—just becoming a citation that gets passed around as accepted truth

"LLMs do not perform the metacognitive functions that are necessary to comply with Rule 11" — while I am certain that this judge knows less about how LLMs work than they think they know, a very interesting holding that the *same analysis* may not violate Rule 11 if by a human vs an LLM

"are you enjoying duo mobile" does a hamburger enjoy being made of quarks. does a fish enjoy linear time. does the mountain enjoy the first taste of a cup of hot chocolate when you get back to the ski lodge. your question means nothing to me. i couldn't enjoy duo mobile even if i tried

This is v much intended to be an essay because (a) that's what I have time for right now and (b) it's either essay or book for this one I think, but this is more a reaction of me being like "call me crazy but I think an article on the financialization of the US economy needs more than 15 pages"

Hello! @adamsopko.bsky.social and I have been working on a proposal to charter an AALS Section on State Constitutional Law. We believe that such a section is long overdue and that it is urgent to foster scholarly community and support in a growing discipline. Links to support this effort below: ⬇️

He turns the pages of books And examines the poems there Saying my god All this has already been written

Novica Tadić

I'm reading a lot of cultural criticism, sociology, economics, etc. papers for this piece and I know how everyone always talks about law review articles being too long but I think other articles are too short. Sorry.

I guess the point is: state AG investigations are relatively underutilized as to bad economic actors and relatively overutilized as to AGs' political opponents. federal supervision is going to let the former group of targets kill some CIDs but we may have to accept that to stop the latter behavior.

@jeffreybillman.bsky.social and @blackmuse.bsky.social Swain's last name is Wood* not Woods :)

Great, well-reported story!

That's not ideal, because state AG CIDs are critical consumer protection tools—and I've expressly argued against making them susceptible to 1A challenges before for that reason. But as I told someone recently, the libertarian wolf inside me is in the driver's seat at the moment.

State AGs have completely gone off the rails. Investigations like the Media Matters one are patently offensive to the constitution. Maybe their toys need taken away. Or at least a federal court babysitter.

If SCOTUS is going to uphold first amendment challenges to state AG investigations that's probably on net a positive development for the world at the moment, even though it's a terrible precedent for governance, law, etc.

External to what?

LinkedIn post bragging about a Kalshi ad featuring live odds for whether Jesus (crucified in background) will be resurrected

Today's: a Kalshi ad

Obviously this is impossible because Alan Moore looks like he's genetically a wizard, it's simply impossible to imagine what he would look like as a schoolboy oh there he is.

wake up babe, woke bill kristol is mogging the democratic party again

Bill Ackman Has a Trade for Eric Adams Mayors, Musk pay, a SpaceX tracking stock and an ATM Ponzi.

Today's find: Bill Ackman told Eric Adams he could "fund his future" by placing a huge Polymarket bet on Cuomo and then announcing he was dropping out, because (accurately) "there is no insider trading [prohibition] on polymarket"

Also reflects my instinct that Sorrell is basically near the bottom of the slippery slope for "how stupidly can we mechanically apply doctrine"—I've always conceptualized the error that way, but I like the Bizarro framing a lot

I'll put it high on my list to read but from the abstract we may just be in mind meld here.

In particular this echoes some of what I've said re: abandoning "low-value" approach (in linked piece) and some in progress stuff on choosing on which side of speaker/regulator dichotomy to build doctrine