home.social

#caselaw — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #caselaw, aggregated by home.social.

  1. The problem with "AI" in legal --- all ethical problems aside --- is that legal is heavily reliant on language in addition to logic. Determining the "correct" use of legal language is a difficult and ill-posed problem with multiple viable solutions and no means to safely choose between them without authoritative case law coming to the rescue.

    Verifying legal solutions is a problem with a high human verification burden, so producing mass "AI" solutions mostly increases human workload, instead of reducing it.

    #Legal #AI #Drafting #CaseLaw

  2. The problem with "AI" in legal --- all ethical problems aside --- is that legal is heavily reliant on language in addition to logic. Determining the "correct" use of legal language is a difficult and ill-posed problem with multiple viable solutions and no means to safely choose between them without authoritative case law coming to the rescue.

    Verifying legal solutions is a problem with a high human verification burden, so producing mass "AI" solutions mostly increases human workload, instead of reducing it.

    #Legal #AI #Drafting #CaseLaw

  3. The problem with "AI" in legal --- all ethical problems aside --- is that legal is heavily reliant on language in addition to logic. Determining the "correct" use of legal language is a difficult and ill-posed problem with multiple viable solutions and no means to safely choose between them without authoritative case law coming to the rescue.

    Verifying legal solutions is a problem with a high human verification burden, so producing mass "AI" solutions mostly increases human workload, instead of reducing it.

    #Legal #AI #Drafting #CaseLaw

  4. The problem with "AI" in legal --- all ethical problems aside --- is that legal is heavily reliant on language in addition to logic. Determining the "correct" use of legal language is a difficult and ill-posed problem with multiple viable solutions and no means to safely choose between them without authoritative case law coming to the rescue.

    Verifying legal solutions is a problem with a high human verification burden, so producing mass "AI" solutions mostly increases human workload, instead of reducing it.

    #Legal #AI #Drafting #CaseLaw

  5. The problem with "AI" in legal --- all ethical problems aside --- is that legal is heavily reliant on language in addition to logic. Determining the "correct" use of legal language is a difficult and ill-posed problem with multiple viable solutions and no means to safely choose between them without authoritative case law coming to the rescue.

    Verifying legal solutions is a problem with a high human verification burden, so producing mass "AI" solutions mostly increases human workload, instead of reducing it.

    #Legal #AI #Drafting #CaseLaw

  6. #Colangelo, the prosecutor, responds, saying the judge’s findings that Trump violated his #GagOrder are directly relevant to Trump's #credibility if he takes the stand & points out there is case #law supporting his argument.

    Justice Merchan has responded well to #CaseLaw - #precedent - in the past & has expressed frustration w/the defense when they don't cite any.

    But Merchan agrees w/defense, saying it would be too prejudicial for a jury to hear that he held Trump in #contempt.

    #TrumpTrial

  7. We have new features for you to experiment! 🧪 Try our replacement of CELEX identifiers by short titles 💻📜
    You can find all about it ➡️ bit.ly/3D59xOn
    #eurlextip #caselaw #eulaw #officialjournal

    🐦🔗: n.respublicae.eu/EURLex/status

  8. @dustcircle

    This seems the whole point of Stare Decisis. Lots of laws are vague and people challenge them, causing courts to fill gaps.

    If the legislature disagrees, it can override precedent set by the court by creating an actual law. But to keep from having a lot of trivial laws that say "Yeah, that thing the court said", we just assume that if the legislature has had a long-time ability to change things and chose not to, it must be right.

    Stare Decisis is in some ways, oddly, a bit like the "Like" button on social media, which is there to avoid a lot of "me too" posts. If the court says something and the public agrees, it can just leave the court case unchallenged and is supposed to eventually be taken as something firm without having to do more.

    This is why it's so VERY improper for judges (or the recent crop of people ironically called justices) to be going back and reconsidering these cases. They treat it as no small matter, and even an oversight, that no one has intervened. But it's a big deal, because they are overriding the fact that majorities for a long time have, in their own way, already said "Like".

    They make the flimsy claim that they have wanted to but haven't had the votes, not realizing they are saying "our position was not the consensus position". That's not how Democracy works.

    And it's only made worse when you see the whole SCOTUS appointment system heavily leveraged to allow popular minorities excess power and to allow false statements by candidates to go unchecked. The Supreme Court is supposed to be about something beyond the popular vote, but that doesn't mean it's supposed to be about private capture of the Court for a selfish purpose. Something way out of kilter there. Not even an enforceable code of ethics among those who seem clearly to have lied to get there, especially on a point so important as policy about Stare Decisis.

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. But I think this is something we all need to discuss in a nation responsive to the people.

    #Law #Abortion #ReproductiveRights #CaseLaw #StareDecisis #Judges #Justices #SCOTUS #philosophy #JudicialPhilosophy