4 ms·

I know I’ve considered applying to law school because I want someone to fight these damn lockdowns. I’m curious how much of this is really a combination of mor

I know I’ve considered applying to law school because I want someone to fight these damn lockdowns. I’m curious how much of this is really a combination of more study time and people seeing value in law. Between election cases, lockdowns, etc law has been the center of a lot of the last year.

haggy102 5y ago
As a potential law student how would you frame your argument against lockdowns in a world where trust in subject matter experts is down across the board (on both side, pro and against lockdowns)?
- jl2718 5y ago
  Irrelevant. You’d have to find statute and precedent for the authorities required in enforcement. Law is not supposed to be rhetoric.
- Covzire 5y ago
  IANAPLS but I'd suggest looking into all the risks that are being completely ignored to chase the one risk that may not that be that big anymore, perhaps never was to warrant the first round of lockdowns to begin with. Who is profitting by keeping the public's focus on COVID like a laser beam and off everything else?
  - cudgy 5y ago
    Amazon, Ebay, Facebook, Twitter, Google, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, Pfizer, Moderna, …
- lettergram 5y ago
  There’s quite a few people I know as well who are considering going to school as well. The gist has been the same, the constitution doesn’t appear to be being followed and as a lawyer you have the ability to defend your rights. I’m not sure what caused this particular spike (a lot of alone time?) but I know a lot of people are feeling this way. In terms of an argument: 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, 14th are amendments are clearly being violated in many regions. Further, given the risk profile of this disease (mitigation’s, high survival rate, etc), there’s no reasonable argument to abridge rights. Particularly, for a long period of time
  - NotSammyHagar 5y ago
    Can you describe why you think the Constitution isn't being followed? That's kind of a generic argument. "People might believe something" without there being any rational basis for it.
    - lettergram 5y ago
      In CA and NY the Supreme Court ruled laws baring religious practices as unconstitutional for one. So, clearly there’s some issue there. In LA they were shutting off peoples utilities for not following mayoral edicts. The first amendment for peaceable assembly doesn’t go away — period — during time of crisis. Facebook has a portal setup where the CA Secretary of State is marking content to ban (court case is making its way through the federal circuits) Arguably, the 9th amendment is being violated as it related to vaccine passports. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt9-2-1/ALDE_00000977/ https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt9-2-1/ALD... There is an absolute insane number of issues with the past year... I can go on and on
      - selimthegrim 5y ago
        The ninth amendment means whatever someone wants it to mean, Louisiana enforced quarantines in the 19th century but I never see that mentioned “The Constitution is not a suicide pact”
  - staticman2 5y ago
    Anyone can hire a lawyer for money. A lawyer will happily argue whatever quirky take on the constitution you have, and happily bill you per hour as they lose in court. I think a gofundme funded by likeminded people to support your doomed lawsuits would be a lot more cost efficient than going to law school.
  - kvathupo 5y ago
    You'd be surprised to learn that the 1st Amendment is the strongest it has ever been: I'd recommend reading Anthony Lewis's "Freedom for the Thought That We Hate." It covers how people were imprisoned for criticizing the government from as late as the early 1800s to the early 20th century in the United States. The power of the 1st Amendment is a new concept.
otterley 5y ago
There are plenty of lawyers out there already who are perfectly capable of making cogent arguments as to why lockdowns are unlawful. But the problem is that they are lawful, so even the most eloquent argument will still lose in court. Adding more voices to the chorus won't help, in the same way that having more attorneys arguing that speed limits and income taxes are unconstitutional won't help. On the other hand, going to law school will help you learn the law, so perhaps you will come out with more realistic views than when you went in. :-)
- lettergram 5y ago
  You assume these people entering law school don’t intend to go into politics. I suspect a large number do intend to make the laws. Also it’s not entirely accurate that lockdowns are lawful. There’s been several Supreme Court cases that have limited what they can do in the past several months.
  - otterley 5y ago
    Spending 6 figures to go to law school for the sole purpose of entering politics is a terrible waste of money. The best way to enter politics is to run in a local race and convince people to vote for you. It'll cost you a lot less than that, and other people may even pay for your campaign. Once you're there, there are staff lawyers to help draft legislation. > Also it’s not entirely accurate that lockdowns are lawful. There’s been several Supreme Court cases that have limited what they can do in the past several months. The only one I'm aware of is an order that prohibited New York from imposing more significant restrictions on churches than shops. That's not a decision that lockdowns are unlawful; it's a decision that they need to be applied evenly. Are you aware of any others?
    - rchaud 5y ago
      Rich, connected people are not going to spend years slumming it in local politics if a more glamorous option is available. A brand-name education and a couple of years at a white-shoe law firm might not get you many votes, but it can open doors to the people that can help you mount a successful campaign.

haggy102 5y ago

As a potential law student how would you frame your argument against lockdowns in a world where trust in subject matter experts is down across the board (on both side, pro and against lockdowns)?

jl2718 5y ago
Irrelevant. You’d have to find statute and precedent for the authorities required in enforcement. Law is not supposed to be rhetoric.
Covzire 5y ago
IANAPLS but I'd suggest looking into all the risks that are being completely ignored to chase the one risk that may not that be that big anymore, perhaps never was to warrant the first round of lockdowns to begin with. Who is profitting by keeping the public's focus on COVID like a laser beam and off everything else?
- cudgy 5y ago
  Amazon, Ebay, Facebook, Twitter, Google, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, Pfizer, Moderna, …
lettergram 5y ago
There’s quite a few people I know as well who are considering going to school as well. The gist has been the same, the constitution doesn’t appear to be being followed and as a lawyer you have the ability to defend your rights. I’m not sure what caused this particular spike (a lot of alone time?) but I know a lot of people are feeling this way. In terms of an argument: 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, 14th are amendments are clearly being violated in many regions. Further, given the risk profile of this disease (mitigation’s, high survival rate, etc), there’s no reasonable argument to abridge rights. Particularly, for a long period of time
- NotSammyHagar 5y ago
  Can you describe why you think the Constitution isn't being followed? That's kind of a generic argument. "People might believe something" without there being any rational basis for it.
  - lettergram 5y ago
    In CA and NY the Supreme Court ruled laws baring religious practices as unconstitutional for one. So, clearly there’s some issue there. In LA they were shutting off peoples utilities for not following mayoral edicts. The first amendment for peaceable assembly doesn’t go away — period — during time of crisis. Facebook has a portal setup where the CA Secretary of State is marking content to ban (court case is making its way through the federal circuits) Arguably, the 9th amendment is being violated as it related to vaccine passports. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt9-2-1/ALDE_00000977/ https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt9-2-1/ALD... There is an absolute insane number of issues with the past year... I can go on and on
    - selimthegrim 5y ago
      The ninth amendment means whatever someone wants it to mean, Louisiana enforced quarantines in the 19th century but I never see that mentioned “The Constitution is not a suicide pact”
- staticman2 5y ago
  Anyone can hire a lawyer for money. A lawyer will happily argue whatever quirky take on the constitution you have, and happily bill you per hour as they lose in court. I think a gofundme funded by likeminded people to support your doomed lawsuits would be a lot more cost efficient than going to law school.
- kvathupo 5y ago
  You'd be surprised to learn that the 1st Amendment is the strongest it has ever been: I'd recommend reading Anthony Lewis's "Freedom for the Thought That We Hate." It covers how people were imprisoned for criticizing the government from as late as the early 1800s to the early 20th century in the United States. The power of the 1st Amendment is a new concept.

otterley 5y ago

There are plenty of lawyers out there already who are perfectly capable of making cogent arguments as to why lockdowns are unlawful. But the problem is that they are lawful, so even the most eloquent argument will still lose in court. Adding more voices to the chorus won't help, in the same way that having more attorneys arguing that speed limits and income taxes are unconstitutional won't help. On the other hand, going to law school will help you learn the law, so perhaps you will come out with more realistic views than when you went in. :-)

lettergram 5y ago
You assume these people entering law school don’t intend to go into politics. I suspect a large number do intend to make the laws. Also it’s not entirely accurate that lockdowns are lawful. There’s been several Supreme Court cases that have limited what they can do in the past several months.
- otterley 5y ago
  Spending 6 figures to go to law school for the sole purpose of entering politics is a terrible waste of money. The best way to enter politics is to run in a local race and convince people to vote for you. It'll cost you a lot less than that, and other people may even pay for your campaign. Once you're there, there are staff lawyers to help draft legislation. > Also it’s not entirely accurate that lockdowns are lawful. There’s been several Supreme Court cases that have limited what they can do in the past several months. The only one I'm aware of is an order that prohibited New York from imposing more significant restrictions on churches than shops. That's not a decision that lockdowns are unlawful; it's a decision that they need to be applied evenly. Are you aware of any others?
  - rchaud 5y ago
    Rich, connected people are not going to spend years slumming it in local politics if a more glamorous option is available. A brand-name education and a couple of years at a white-shoe law firm might not get you many votes, but it can open doors to the people that can help you mount a successful campaign.