No dog in this fight. But seems highly unlikely appellate court let's size of judgment angt Gawker stand, quite apart from verdict itself.
@joshtpm it seems like the judgment itself makes many kinds of papparazi illegal; would be surprised if it was constitutional.
-
-
@joshtpm also, seems pretty dubious to unseal docs for "legitimate public interest" but say no legit interest in the tape. -
@joshtpm TLDR this is a jury result, and juries don't like papparazi. But judges have had the chance to nuke 'em before and haven't. -
@joshtpm this does not seem likely to be upheld.pic.twitter.com/1zagG6P4KM
-
@joshtpm and this is why we don't let juries rule on constitutional rights.pic.twitter.com/I1k2W3ufrd
-
@joshtpm I also have no dog in it, but I have trouble believing this result withstands judicial scrutiny (if it doesn't make new precedent)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.