Yeah TFW when your intentionally-generic nickname gets too high profile. I blame Rainbow 6.
That Bivens thing was an interesting read. I don't know that I came away from it with anything other than "you usually can't sue the Federal government, unless they pass a law saying you can, unless it's one of a narrowly defined (and apparently arbitrary) set of the circumstances that the Supreme Court says are cool. So um we need never wonder why people neither understand nor respect the law.
I don't know that I came away from it with anything other than "you usually can't sue the Federal government, unless they pass a law saying you can, unless it's one of a narrowly defined (and apparently arbitrary) set of the circumstances that the Supreme Court says are cool.
Yeah, that's a pretty good summary of the Bivens doctrine. The Anwar al-Awlaki court decision is frustrating because the court says U.S. citizens have a Fifth Amendment interest in not being blown up in drone strikes, buuuuuuuuut because this is in the area of national security and the military, the plaintiffs lose. It's a super arbitrary decision. Sure, his rights were violated by the feds but no you can't do anything about it.
I am pretty good at understanding normie understanding of / interaction with the law because I have very little tolerance lawyering -- that is to say arguing over what the rules mean. After a few minutes of that, I just do what I do and see what the consequences are.
Obvious, moral stuff like "don't hit people" is fine, but don't ask me how to pay taxes. I definitely make arbitrary decisions on filing my taxes, which I still do myself mainly because it's almost entirely automated and because I move states too much, so nobody wants to work for me.
Yeah TFW when your intentionally-generic nickname gets too high profile. I blame Rainbow 6.
That Bivens thing was an interesting read. I don't know that I came away from it with anything other than "you usually can't sue the Federal government, unless they pass a law saying you can, unless it's one of a narrowly defined (and apparently arbitrary) set of the circumstances that the Supreme Court says are cool. So um we need never wonder why people neither understand nor respect the law.
Yeah, that's a pretty good summary of the Bivens doctrine. The Anwar al-Awlaki court decision is frustrating because the court says U.S. citizens have a Fifth Amendment interest in not being blown up in drone strikes, buuuuuuuuut because this is in the area of national security and the military, the plaintiffs lose. It's a super arbitrary decision. Sure, his rights were violated by the feds but no you can't do anything about it.
I am pretty good at understanding normie understanding of / interaction with the law because I have very little tolerance lawyering -- that is to say arguing over what the rules mean. After a few minutes of that, I just do what I do and see what the consequences are.
Obvious, moral stuff like "don't hit people" is fine, but don't ask me how to pay taxes. I definitely make arbitrary decisions on filing my taxes, which I still do myself mainly because it's almost entirely automated and because I move states too much, so nobody wants to work for me.