Good question: "After the release of the #Epstein files, why have there been so few arrests?"
https://www.npr.org/2026/04/03/nx-s1-5766260/epstein-files-arrests-doj-prosecutors
Bad answer from the #Trump #DOJ: "There have not been additional prosecutions beyond Epstein and Maxwell because there has not been credible evidence that their activities extended to Epstein's network."
"According to an @insidehighered analysis of more than 60 key #HigherEd lawsuits, the [Trump administration] has the upper hand in just 17 cases as of April 1."
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/government/courts/2026/04/03/lawsuits-against-trump-pile-strategies-shift
#Academia #AcademicMastodon #Censorship #DefendResearch #Trump #TrumpVResearch #Universities #USLaw #USPol #USPolitics
RE: https://c.im/@cdarwin/116341381830665061
Seems like the Regime is running out of steam?
Interesting case in which the usual issues surrounding the retraction of a journal article are further complicated by a NY state law criminalizing the distribution of information that endangers health.
https://retractionwatch.com/2026/04/02/judge-lawsuit-controversial-adolescents-paxil-study-329/
PS: Apart from the specific issues raised by this case (whether a certain antidepressant is safe and effective for teenagers), I'm interested in this more general question: Do US journals have a #FirstAmendment right not to retract articles, regardless of the circumstances, for example, even when the articles have been shown to be false and harmful and even when local law prohibits the distribution of such information? Is "forced retraction" a kind of #censorship prohibited by the Constitution?
Before you comment, note that this cases raises a lot of important questions about our tolerance for harm. But I'm trying to raise a slightly different question about the interaction of scholarly norms and public law.
Every Law a Commit β US Law in GitHub
https://v1d0b0t.github.io/blog/posts/2026-03-29-every-law-a-commit.html
#HackerNews #EveryLawACommit #USLaw #GitHub #TechForGood #OpenSource
Alas, per the U.S.A. Constitution, the President does indeed have the treaty power, with the advice and consent of the Senate, and things have already changed since the 18th century.
So if it were ever tested in court, this Supreme Court, the most judicially activist in history, would probably strike down that law about not withdrawing from NATO without consent as unconstitutional.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C2-1-10/ALDE_00012961/
RE: https://universeodon.com/@georgetakei/116330870059981275
Seems like the White Master Race is really into raping kids...
A federal judge just ruled that #Trump can face civil liability for inciting violence in the #Jan6 #insurrection. His incendiary speeches that day were "unofficial" acts not covered by presidential immunity.
See the decision by Amit Mehta of the DC district court.
https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2021cv0400-219
Also see the summary in Politico.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/31/trump-setback-civil-suits-capitol-riot-00853761
petersuber
Peter Suber
Lazarou Monkey Terror πππ
Hacker News
JdeBP