The website The Volokh Conspiracy is promoting a subscription to Reason magazine as a way for readers to celebrate their independence, targeting law professors, contrarians, libertarians, and those who value independent perspectives. No specific details are provided about the promotion or its terms. The key angle of this article is a promotional pitch rather than a news report.
Written by the local model on 2026-09-05,
using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the
same event.
The article's own words the score was based on. Each is quoted
verbatim and was checked against the article text before being
stored, so you can find it in the original.
Always independent
rightassertion of independence implies opposition to government control
⚖️ Leans right
further left than this
🔴 22% hedged
7 of 32📰 publisher trust 86
“The articles cover different topics: one discusses a court case (Douglas v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co.) and the other promotes a magazine subscription.”
🔮 Perhaps most analogously to alienation of affections, if Alan breaches his contract with Betty, and Cathy encouraged him to breach it, she will in many situations be liable for intentional interference with contract.
🔮 If you have followed the factual allegations in the case, please post a comment and indicate how you would have voted if you were a juror, based on your knowledge (even if limited) of the factual allegations, and why you would have so voted.
🔮 As part of this mea culpa, Ms. Hall assured the court that she had taken the remedial measure of verifying that the remaining citations in the brief were legitimate authority and pledged that, going forward (presumably in her representation of other clients), she would not rely on any AI tool "for legal research without confirming each authority" or file anything that includes citations she has not independently verified.
🔮 Such a requirement would be impractical, unduly burdensome, and unnecessarily duplicative given the availability of reasonable alternative procedures to guard against erroneous citations.
🔮 If it were, then any profit-seeking news organization could face liability for its failure to investigate, contrary to the principle that a publisher is not "required to seek out contrary stories" to insulate itself from a finding of actual malice.
🔮 Under the rational basis standard, government conduct "is presumed to be valid and will be sustained if the classification drawn by the statute is rationally related to a legitimate state interest."
🔮 To state a violation of § 784.049, a plaintiff must plausibly allege
- Defendant published a sexually explicit image of Plaintiff on an internet website;
- The image contained or conveyed Plaintiff's personal identification information;
- Defendant acted willfully and maliciously, for no legitimate purpose, and with the intent of causing substantial emotional distress to Plaintiff;
- Plaintiff did not consent to the publication….
The dispute was about whether the video showed a "sexually explicit image," and the court said no:
[T]he statute defines {"sexually explicit image"} as any photograph or video that depicts "nudity" or depicts "any person engaging in sexual conduct." …