You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Breaking news: A federal judge in Florida issued an injunction requiring 32 counties in the state to provide sample Spanish-language ballots. The plaintiffs in the case said Puerto Ricans who moved to Florida were being denied access to the ballot under the Voting Rights Actpic.twitter.com/jwUZ4GqrMS
I am not a lawyer but this is the most incredible opening to a court opinion I have ever seen.pic.twitter.com/7q7mE76f5I
U.S. District Judge Mark Walker: “While lost on some, Puerto Rico is part of the United States.”
this judge is ice cold when it comes to the Voting Rights Act and the travesty that is Roberts' shambles of an opinion in Shelby Countypic.twitter.com/Xo7qmI0r5T
RBG was right on every point of her dissent: “Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.”
The citation.
The citation really adds to the burn. Masterful.
Counterpoint: Judge's aren't as funny as they think. "Once again, with depressing regularity . . . " would get the point across just as well, without the cuteness.
If a germane pop culture reference makes court opinions (and, by extension, the law) more accessible to readers outside the legal profession, I'm all for it.
Does it really do that here, though? Wouldn't "Here we go again" have conveyed the message just as well?
In terms of relevance to the general public, I don't think so, because it not only communicates a certain exasperation but also imputes a certain "regular Joe" character to the judge. In small doses, I really don't see a problem here.
If this judge did this constantly - if it became their "schtick", so to speak - you might have a stronger argument as to its propriety. As a one-off or occasional thing? As I said, I'm all for it.
Maybe it's because I see so much of this - it seems to be a trend for judges to insert pop culture references and humor into opinions - that I'm a bit sick of it. But also, it can seem disrespectful to litigants (here, admittedly, the litigant being disrespected is the state).
Seriously? I've been in the legal field for 25 years and I've never seen it be a trend. It's a one-off, and hardly a big deal. Yes, it would get old if any one judge made a point of such references consistently, but this is hardly worth getting worked up about.
Thanks for your input. It’s appreciated.
Not a patch on Ward LJ: “This case involves a number of – and here I must not fall into Dr Spooner’s error – warring bankers.”
Well, I AM a lawyer, and I’ve never seen anything like that.
I tried to find one, but couldn’t, but I know there have been a few decisions where the first letters of paragraphs spell out a message, too.
This federal judge’s long comparison to Wagner’s The Flying Dutchman is my favorite off-the-wall intro, but in fairness this case was about ships so it’s less weird than citing Groundhog Day.pic.twitter.com/O07XNWj1qG
I’m an English lawyer. We learn about the judgments of the late, great Lord Denning who had form for this sort of thing. Eg Hinz v Berry - a case about a horrible car accident; “It was bluebell time in Kent...”
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
