3 ms·

> Lawfare? Yes the court's judgment is so high, 1B USD, that he cannot make money without it being garnished. How does he get back to work? I personally do not

> Lawfare? Yes the court's judgment is so high, 1B USD, that he cannot make money without it being garnished. How does he get back to work? I personally do not think anyone should lose their livelihood over speech, NOTE: I did not say free speech. What he did is reprehensible but not enough that he is basically black balled from making a living. Penalties yes, loss of livelihood no.

gonzo 2y ago
Alex is free to work at the local car wash.
jpk 2y ago
Having your wages garnished doesn't mean you starve to death. He's perfectly capable of making a living, supporting himself and his dependents, if any, but his ability to build wealth will be restricted. I don't know the particulars of this case, but generally: "The garnishment amount is limited to 25% of your disposable earnings for that week (what's left after mandatory deductions) or the amount by which your disposable earnings for that week exceed 30 times the federal minimum hourly wage, whichever is less." https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/if-wages-are-garnished-rights-33050.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/if-wages-are-garnish...
kabdib 2y ago
$1B is the amount it took to get him to stop. He could have stopped earlier, and had ample opportunity, but that was apparently his price.
rvense 2y ago
The judgment was not for an off-the-cuff remark or writing a few paragraphs online. He ran a smear campaign against people whose kids were shot, for almost a decade, even though he knew what he was saying was untrue. Jones's "speech" had severe real-world consequences for his targets, and there's no reason to assume he has repented. It would be no injustice if he was never allowed near a microphone again.
darkarmani 2y ago
> Yes the court's judgment is so high, 1B USD, that he cannot make money without it being garnished. How does he get back to work? I personally do not think anyone should lose their livelihood over speech He was harassing parents of dead children in order to personally enrich himself. Why do you think he shouldn't have to forgo his ill begotten gains? It's only 1B USD, because he refused to stop doing it. And then he decided not to really show up for court and accept the summary judgement of 1B USD. Most of his penalty has nothing to do with speech. He can keep on speaking all he wants. He might suffer consequences, but he is free to say whatever he wants to.

gonzo 2y ago

Alex is free to work at the local car wash.

jpk 2y ago

Having your wages garnished doesn't mean you starve to death. He's perfectly capable of making a living, supporting himself and his dependents, if any, but his ability to build wealth will be restricted. I don't know the particulars of this case, but generally: "The garnishment amount is limited to 25% of your disposable earnings for that week (what's left after mandatory deductions) or the amount by which your disposable earnings for that week exceed 30 times the federal minimum hourly wage, whichever is less." https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/if-wages-are-garnished-rights-33050.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/if-wages-are-garnish...

kabdib 2y ago

$1B is the amount it took to get him to stop. He could have stopped earlier, and had ample opportunity, but that was apparently his price.

rvense 2y ago

The judgment was not for an off-the-cuff remark or writing a few paragraphs online. He ran a smear campaign against people whose kids were shot, for almost a decade, even though he knew what he was saying was untrue. Jones's "speech" had severe real-world consequences for his targets, and there's no reason to assume he has repented. It would be no injustice if he was never allowed near a microphone again.

darkarmani 2y ago

> Yes the court's judgment is so high, 1B USD, that he cannot make money without it being garnished. How does he get back to work? I personally do not think anyone should lose their livelihood over speech He was harassing parents of dead children in order to personally enrich himself. Why do you think he shouldn't have to forgo his ill begotten gains? It's only 1B USD, because he refused to stop doing it. And then he decided not to really show up for court and accept the summary judgement of 1B USD. Most of his penalty has nothing to do with speech. He can keep on speaking all he wants. He might suffer consequences, but he is free to say whatever he wants to.