Regulation has made Americans considerably poorer:

DOJ trying to figure out how to write an indictment in a case where (a) the defendant will not plead guilty; and (b) the courts will flyspeck the entire prosecution from start to finish to ensure that all constitutional requirements have been scrupulously observed.

Incredibly, there are self-described “scholars” who confidently assert—in book, blog and debate formats—that we know *precisely* how often this kind of thing happens with police. But that’s nonsense—if fact we have no idea whatsoever. But we do know they usually get away with it.

Murder is down 41% in Philly, 30% in Baltimore, 38% in New Orleans, 31% in DC, 41% in San Francisco. We're seeing a historic plunge in violent crime, which spiked during the Trump admin. I'm skeptical the president has much effect on crime rates, but this talking point is silly.

You know, you could spend your whole life trying to be sufficiently unfit to be either the Democratic or the Republican Party’s nominee for president and not even come close.

The only way plea-driven mass adjudication could even *remotely* be consistent with the Constitution is if we can be highly confident that it never becomes coercive. But in fact the opposite is true—we can be highly confident that plea bargaining OFTEN becomes coercive.

Gamer friends: What’s a good game/system for me to play with my 11yo son? He does Roblox, Minecraft, etc., but they leave me flat. More interested in a 1st-person shooter we can play together and that’ll be easy for me in particular to jump into. Thanks!

Another CA5 QI case where there's a very sharp disagreement about video evidence between the majority (which denies QI) and Judge Jones' dissent. Judge Don Willett says that a real jury should decide this kind of dispute, not a JV jury. ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/2…

Raffi Melkonian Judge Don Willett Amen Judge Don Willett. Also I’m stealing the line “junior-varsity jury.”

TFW when you claim to be a textualist/originalist, but just can’t stop inventing and applying preposterously contra-textual govt immunities to let your former clients off the hook for their blatant misconduct.

It’s hilarious that prosecutors can’t agree on whether to admit or deny that plea bargaining is often blatantly coercive. Some—the honest but not overly sophisticated ones—are like, “Duh—what are you, simple?” While the more cynical, sophisticated ones keep trying to deny it:

OK, I was just a bit harsh with some nitwit who doesn’t understand how plea-bargaining works in real life. But in my defense, I only have so much patience for statist rubes with strong opinions about something they have no more conception of than my cat does about string theory.

There are a few things more discreditable than being exceptionally good at inducing people to waive their right not to condemn themselves.

Can one be both a traitor and a useful idiot simultaneously, or are they mutually exclusive concepts? Asking for—well, you know.

There are any number of circuit judges, from across the ideological spectrum, who would tell you (privately) that the issue is *not* a dearth of certiorari-worthy appeals, but rather #SCOTUS’s increasing refusal to take them.