The article doesn’t make this obvious, but does mention that she got her money back.

“After she filed the lawsuit, and about two years post-seizure, the agency returned Martin's cash. But she continued in court in hopes that the judiciary would agree that the FBI was violating people's due process rights by seizing assets with effectively no explanation.”

She lost because she was trying to keep the suit alive to get a precedent. That is very hard to do, and in this case should have been allowed.

Looks like Fitzpatrick was the only republican who voted no on the rules vote. It also looks like they've been at it literally all night. Hakim Jeffries has been going for like 5+ hours.

Could you explain what you mean by "opening up the vote" and how that put pressure on them? Do you mean that he held it open really long and that allowed them to just feel pressure over time to change their vote?

The third party doctrine is bullshit, but it is current law, so it's not at all surprising that this would be the outcome here.

I think you may be thinking of Vida.io? It looks like they pivoted away from bitcoin to ai.

Normally I use the recent posts, however there are a few territories that I like to read everything (and ensure I catch everything), such as ~Politics_And_Law, and I use the drop down to drill down to those.

In case anyone is interested, here are links to the cases: Malikie v. Core Scientific Malikie v. MARA

There is no such thing as intrinsic value, except in the limited case of a sapient being. In order for value to be intrinsic, the thing must value itself, which is only possible for a sapient being.

There are intrinsic properties, but value is always and everywhere extrinsic.

Here’s the ungated WSJ article.

Qualified Immunity is unqualified evil.

Here is the complaint, since the article doesn't link it.

Here is the decision.

Barone's Law: "All process arguments are insincere, including this one."

@JeremyRubin:

Me:

Round Two!

@JeremyRubin:

Me: