Considering they dropped all charges with no prejudice, the city was in the wrong here.

FYI: "without prejudice" means that the city prosecutors are free to refile the charges again at a later date. Or they can file a different set of charges for the same conduct.

The US beef supply is squeezed because some big droughts from a couple of years ago forced ranchers to sell off a lot of their herds.

Now, they don't have the herds to supply the demand, and you can't just magick more cows into existence. Once the problem exists, it takes a bunch of time to grow calves into cows.

The problem is exacerbated by a dynamic where the current high prices encourage ranchers to sell their cattle instead of keeping them around to grow the herd.

You don't actually need to "press" a criminal charge to file a civil lawsuit for the parallel tort. If you've got the evidence, you've got the evidence.

The original 100k fee is still halted by a court injunction. This version has some slightly different terms, but the legal reasoning seems even more suspect.

When I was in school, the full price of the cafeteria lunch, with 8 oz milk, was $1.25. That was very affordable, and the federal nutrition guidelines meant it wasn't that unhealthy. Finally the actual food wasn't actually all that unpalatable either.

Breakfast was free for everyone under a federally funded program. But I didn't eat that because you had to show up at 6:30 am to get it.

BOAT: Break Out Another Thousand.

B didn't just say "that is not true." B also made a bunch of defamatory statements about A like "A is a liar."

As part of proving her case for those defamatory statements, A also proved up the truth of her underlying accusations.

Steve1989mre: "Let's get that out on a tray. Nice!"

When I took intro to law in undergrad, abandoned property was handled on a finders, keepers basis. I don't know this jurisdiction, but, you know, what's the crime here?

The Atchafalaya is a distributary, not a tributary.

This month, the government responded to Streever's lawsuit, confirming his allegations while attempting to rebut them.

My God, these DOJ lawyers are bad these days.

Shhhhh! We can't talk about the national debt until a D is in charge.

I assume, it's not relevant here, because otherwise the stars would appear red.

Correct. The stars you can see with your eye are mostly all too close by to have a strong red shift.

I'm thinking the New York Times doesn't want to use "capture" here because they think this conflict is "not of international character" as per Geneva conventions.

This is a reminder to American service members:

Your oath of allegiance is to the United States, not to Donald Trump, Joe Biden, or Kamala Harris. You have a duty to obey lawful orders issued under the authority of the commander in chief. But it is your duty to disobey unlawful orders.

What that actually looked like:

And they are all welcome back if they can satisfy the Linux Foundation that they're not affiliated with a sanctioned entity on the SDN list.

If transgender people don't exist, then exactly whom are they trying to kick out?

What the fuck is Justice Jackson doing ?

Here's one analysis:

Jackson gets this application because it's from the 1st circuit, and she is assigned to initially handle all shadow docket matters from the 1st circuit. By writing this admin stay, she potentially keeps the full court from stepping in and doing it for her. And this way she gets to set the 48 hour limit. This could cause the whole case to be decided one way or another a lot faster.

The supreme court let the trans passport case sit on the shadow "emergency" docket for 48 days. This stay gives the 1st circuit approx the weekend to make their decision, then the 48 hour deadline puts some oomph on the rest of scotus to make their decision.

If Justice Jackson did nothing, and 5 votes on the court intervened to issue a stay at 1 am, then there would be no 48 hour limit.

Ladies and gentlemen, vote for democratic socialism. It's the fiscally responsible choice.