Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Andrew Fleischman Profile picture
@ASFleischman
Jul 13, 2021 • 7 tweets • 3 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
Sacha Baron Cohen prevails against former Alabama Supreme Court Justice and Guy Who Got Banned From the Mall for Skeeving on Children Roy Moore.

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco… Image
Moore lost because he signed a contract explicitly waiving his right to sue for the things he was suing for, even though he struck through another provision about waiving his right to sue for intrusion on his privacy, a cause of action he didn't bring. ImageImage
Moore argued that he was defrauded because he thought the interview would be friendly.

But he agreed, in writing, that he was not relying on representation that the interview would be friendly. ImageImage
Kayla Moore, meanwhile, loses under the First Amendment because a reasonable person would not believe Sacha Baron Cohen was actually claming to own a pedophile detector, when a real device would have blown up immediately as soon as Roy Moore entered a room. Image
It was, in fact, a pretty silly thing to claim to be defamed by. Image
Long story short, you can't sue when you sign a contract not to sue, and you can't sue for defamation when the person "defaming" you is a deliberately ridiculous character on a satirical television series.

Now let's all rewatch this glorious clip:

rollingstone.com/tv/tv-news/wat…
Also, one final takeaway: this opinion could have easily been extremely cutesy and filled with Borat references. But, thankfully, the judge wrote a sober opinion about the law and the facts and didn't use this as an opportunity to try out his tight five.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Andrew Fleischman

Andrew Fleischman Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ASFleischman

Andrew Fleischman Profile picture
Sep 15
Notably, Governor Abbott pardoned a man who gunned down a veteran at a BLM march after trying to run over a woman in a wheelchair.

So, his views on acceptable behavior are a bit malleable.
A straightforward example of unjustified political violence. Image
Also Daniel Perry was hitting on underaged girls. Image
Read 4 tweets
Andrew Fleischman Profile picture
Sep 2
If you have hired a criminal defense attorney and he is requesting a bench trial, that is often a good time to get a second opinion.
A bench trial is a trial in front of a judge with no jury.

It is almost impossible to appeal from that verdict, even if the judge admits inadmissible evidence or finds guilt where no evidence exists.

Appellate courts will just assume the judge knows best.
Defense attorneys do this for two reasons:

1: they want to plead you guilty but you don't want to, so they figure this is like a slow plea that gets you a lesser punishment.

2: you have unsympathetic facts but a good legal defense.
Read 8 tweets
Andrew Fleischman Profile picture
Jul 27
So, first off, this is bullshit. There was no evidence that Arbery ever posed as a jogger to rob people (this makes no sense?)

But, the thing is, the McMichaels admitted they didn't see Arbery commit a crime, but they still chased him with their car and shot him.
If you chase someone with your car, that is aggravated assault. And you cannot be justified doing something once you commit a felony. You can't shoot an armed homeowner, for instance, if he tries to stop you from burglarizing his house.
Now let's say it turns out that the armed homeowner is a murderer.

That shit isn't relevant, because no set of facts about his past make it ok to break into his house and shoot him.
Read 6 tweets
Andrew Fleischman Profile picture
Jul 19
The first thing to note about Trump's WSJ lawsuit is that he filed it federally in Florida.

In almost every jurisdiction, filing a lawsuit federally helps you avoid the anti-SLAPP statute.

But not in Florida. Image
So, for instance, when Dan Bongino filed a lawsuit against the Daily Beast for saying he was fired, the Daily Beast filed an anti-SLAPP motion, even though it was in federal court.

And prevailed, because the suit was without merit.

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…Image
Image
Also, President Trump was required to give the WSJ five days notice before filing suit.

Obviously, by filing the next day, he made that impossible.

The remedy is dismissal.

And I suspect that means Trump pays the WSJ's legal fees. Image
Read 11 tweets
Andrew Fleischman Profile picture
Apr 10
So my client is a paraplegic. One day, a Fulton County police department asked him to come down and answer a few questions.

A woman alleged that he KICKED her door down and assaulted her.

And they were calling him down to arrest him, not talk to him.
The client had some pretty good objections. For instance, he is paraplegic. He is physically incapable of committing the crime as alleged.

Also, he had not seen the woman in ten years.

Ahhh, the police officer said, then how did she pick you out of a lineup?
The client says "yes, we did date a number of years ago, but I have been married for ten years. We did not just break up as she said"
Read 28 tweets
Andrew Fleischman Profile picture
Feb 17
There was a NYT op ed claiming that there's a good argument that the children of illegal immigrants don't get birthright citizenship.

Before I get into why it's wrong, first, I want to talk about all the ways we know that the 14th Amendment DOES provide such citizenship.
First and foremost, there's the text of the 14th amendment:

It says that to become a citizen, you need only be born and subject to jursidiction.

And children of illegal immigrants can indeed be sued, jailed, or taxed, as needed. Image
So if we're just applying the plain text of the amendment, and the ordinary meaning of jurisdiction, it's very strongly in support.
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(