Christian Mott

Christian Mott

@cjmott.bsky.social

Studying punishment, criminal law, moral psychology, & experimental jurisprudence. christianmott.com

1K followers1.3K following2.3K posts

Fun fact: Sometimes a lawyer's job is to tell the client things they don't want to hear, to question a client's representations if they appear inconsistent with other evidence, and to refuse to make arguments or take positions that they know to be frivolous.

Russell Brandom@russellbrandom.bsky.social

A telling passage from Zuck's WSJ op-ed: "Imagine everyone has a superintelligent lawyer. Justice would be carried out much more fairly and efficiently than it is today." I'm really not sure this is true!

Always a good sign when your lease contract includes a natural history of mold: "Molds are naturally occurring microscopic organisms which reproduce by spores and have existed practically from the beginning of time...."

The government providing us information infringes on our God-given right to harm ourselves without knowing it.

Right Wing Watch @rightwingwatch.bsky.social

MAGA cultist Eric Metaxas was outraged by seeing an air quality alert triggered by the Canadian wildfires that suggested people limit outdoor activity: "How dare they say that. Who has the right to tell me or you or anyone anything? It's a free country. I can do whatever I want."

The classic England experience would be Argentina scoring in stoppage time; England being unable to create any offense in extra time because they've taken off so many offensive players; and then Harry Kane putting the decisive penalty kick over the bar.

The ICC isn't the only body that can prosecute war crimes. US federal criminal law also prohibits them.

Matt Novak@paleofuture.bsky.social

Trump was suggesting this morning they could hit Iran’s bridges and critical infrastructure. Looks like that could be happening now.

I am no expert on the rules of soccer, but I was under the impression that a red card can be awarded for "[a] tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent," regardless of the intent of the challenging player. (Quote is from the IFAB Laws of the Game.)

Seeing a lot of people arguing that the Balogun red card was wrong because he didn't intend to step on the other player's ankle. But I think the argument would have to be that stepping on the ankle, whether intentional or not, did not endanger the safety of the other player.

It is a very interesting fact that several major US sports do require a finding of intent before an ejection. But I do not think soccer does, at least for this type of offense.

We'd be better off banning social media for people over 16.

alpha @omarsbigsister.bsky.social

Dems' "Project 2029" first major policy proposal: an online child safety plan — narrowing Sec. 230, banning social media for kids under 16, promoting phone-free childhoods and more. Already backed by Cory Booker, Mikie Sherrill, Randi Weingarten + Jonathan Haidt. LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Slaughter also weakens partisan balance requirements on agencies (e.g., FEC). President can now fire commissioners from the other political party, leaving just enough to have a quorum (if he wants) but giving his party the majority (e.g., FEC) or a larger majority (eg., SEC, FCC).

However, the FEC can only take some actions with affirmative votes of four commissioners (rather than a majority of some smaller quorum), see 52 USC 30106(c), which limits the impact on the FEC in particular. (Is Slaughter's reasoning compatible with partisan appointment requirements? I don't know)

I think Sotomayor's dissent is correct that the answer to this question, based on the majority's reasoning, is likely no. Hard to see how removal restrictions on inferior officers (including ALJs) could be compatible with Slaughter's view of the presidency. Hope I'm wrong, though.

Christian Mott@cjmott.bsky.social

So after Slaughter, the PCAOB gets its for-cause removal protections back, right?

If James Carville and Van Jones really don't want DSA members in the Democratic Party, maybe they should support reforms that would make multiparty democracy possible in this country (e.g., expanding the House, proportional multimember districts, and mandatory RCV in Senate elections).

Not sure what can be done about the Presidency, unfortunately, since Article IV doesn't give Congress the same power to make or alter regulations for choosing Electors that it does for choosing Senators and Representatives.

Time to see if Austria and Algeria even bother trying to score, since a draw gives each country their best possible outcome.

Christian Mott@cjmott.bsky.social

Seems non-ideal that Austria will be indifferent between winning and drawing its match with Algeria (as they play Spain either way) and Algeria would prefer to draw (and play Switzerland) than either to win (and play Spain) or lose (and be eliminated).

Learned something new about the offsides rule. I don't like it. Seems like there should be room for refs to disregard marginal offsides when the offensive player clearly gained no advantage from it. (E.g., this Iran goal, the Colombia goal that was just disallowed.)

Chris Vannini@chrisvannini.com

Some more clarification. Offsides is actually measured by the second-last defender, and because the goalkeeper came out, that defender further back isn't the measuring point.

My grandfather made the desk I use in MIT's Hobby Shop when he was a professor there. (It's probably from the late 70s or 80s, since he died in 1992).

This post is unavailable.

Seems non-ideal that Austria will be indifferent between winning and drawing its match with Algeria (as they play Spain either way) and Algeria would prefer to draw (and play Switzerland) than either to win (and play Spain) or lose (and be eliminated).

It could be good for USMNT if England finishes second in their group. (If Spain wins their group and both win in the round of 32, England would then play Spain. Winner would play USMNT in quarters, if they make it. Somehow, England seems capable of both beating Spain and losing to USMNT.)

For a discussion of how many damages remedies exist under Spending Clause statutes, see this interesting student note. (Discussing the effect of a prior SCOTUS decision cutting back on remedies for suits under such statutes.)

harvardlawreview.orgWithout Remedies: The Effect of Cummings and the Contract-Law Analogy on Antidiscrimination Spending Clause Plaintiffs - Harvard Law ReviewIt has become increasingly difficult for civil rights plaintiffs to vindicate their rights in federal court. Barriers to successful lawsuits are plentiful. Qualified immunity...
Mark Joseph Stern@mjsdc.bsky.social

The upshot here is that a prisoner cannot sue a corrections officer who violated his religious liberty under a federal statute that guarantees free exercise behind bars. But the implications sweep way beyond this case to seriously neuter other spending clause legislation. A REALLY bad decision.

As the article notes, to receive expanded access, the patient must have a "serious or immediately life-threatening disease or condition." A serious condition is one that "has substantial impact on day-to-day functioning." If that is true of the president, the public should have a right to know.

fda.govExpanded AccessExpanded Access (Compassionate Use)
Lizzy Lawrence@lizzylawrence.bsky.social

EXCLUSIVE: Eli Lilly gave compassionate use access to retatrutide, their unapproved powerful obesity drug, to a 79-year-old man in April. The application was arranged by a top doctor at NIH, and cleared by the FDA. www.statnews.com/2026/06/23/e...

I have no specific knowledge of Anthropic, but this form of inference is not generally valid. Again and again, established incumbents in new and growing areas have requested regulations, since they have the resources to pay compliance costs while may potential market entrants do not.

This post is unavailable.

Fwiw, Maine has ranked-choice voting for federal offices in the primary and the general. Write-in votes only count if they are for a candidate who has declared by a deadline. In the D primary, the candidates are Platner, Mills, and David Costello. The one declared write-in is Andrea LaFlamme.

If, say, a bunch of people wanted to avoid one particular candidate winning the primary, they would not need to coordinate on an alternative. They could just rank all the other candidates.

Very strange to issue this order 36 hours after the deadline the applicants requested and after COB on the day that the Alabama Director of Elections had testified was the deadline for Alabama to reassign voters from the Remedial Plan to the 2023 Plan in time for the August special primary.

Steven Mazie@stevenmazie.bsky.social

BREAKING: Supreme Court rules 6-3 in favor of Alabama Republicans’ bid to use what the lower court decided was an unconstitutionally racially gerrymandered map in the 2026 congressional election

I guess they were waiting for the dissent but, given the time constraint, I don't know why they didn't follow the procedure in AARP and issue the per curiam with dissent to follow.

Christian Mott reposted

PACER is an insecure and illegally expensive disaster that’s been hacked numerous times. We and others have been working on the new bill below to finally fix it. This will make it free and modern. Let’s go!

Courtney Bublé@courtneybuble.bsky.social

Wyden and Kennedy introduced a bill to modernize PACER

I'm puzzled about how to interpret reports like this one. Is it just that the AI companies haven't quite worked out the right way to price their product yet? Or that the costs of the computational resources needed to replace a human worker are actually higher than a salary?

FinTwitter@fintwitter.bsky.social

MAJOR COMPANIES ARE STARTING TO CUT BACK ON AI USE AS COSTS IN SOME CASES ARE NOW HIGHER THAN HUMAN WORKERS.

I know there are many more important things going on in the world, but I am shaken by the news that my favorite restaurant, Clover Food Lab, is closing down ☹️

If anyone wants a sense of how much less serious the US is about punishing public corruption now than it was in the past, the February 20, 1792 law creating the Post Office made any postal worker who fraudulently received *incorrect postage* "incapable of holding any office under the United States."

And any Treasury official who "directly or indirectly [was] concerned or interested in carrying on the business of trade or commerce" committed a "high misdemeanor," punished by a permanent bar on "holding any office under the United States." There was even a bounty for anyone who reported it!