The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Read the 1st Am in law school: “CONGRESS shall make no law…” then
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 14th, 2025 12:58 AM Author: soul-stirring painfully honest box office rigor It seemed pretty straightforward to me. I wondered why it was “unconstitutional” for a state to endorse Christianity or otherwise restrict speech. Then I learned about the doctrine of “incorporation” and burst out laughing in con law.
Wow just do “incorporate” I.e. be a judge who writes a legal opinion that redlines the constitution because it “sounds better this way”
There were so many moments like this in con law.
Even out the gate Marbury v Madison was nothing more than a massive power grab. Just read the opinion. “I decree as a judge that judges and only judges get to “interpret” the constitution. No it doesn’t say that anywhere in the constitution itself but I’m the one writing the opinions!”
Who can take this stuff seriously. |
Date: November 14th, 2025 1:03 AM Author: soul-stirring painfully honest box office rigor “nor shall any state deprive any person of life liberty or property without due process of law”
“We just read this one again and it means that a state can’t outlaw abortion and it also says that a state can’t pass a law saying that two men can’t marry each other it’s really hard to see you have to read it really closely!” |
 |
Date: November 14th, 2025 1:06 AM Author: unholy iridescent degenerate bro they "discovered" those rights, they didnt make them up. they were always there waiting to be discovered by bold scholar ships sailing off to parts unknown! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5797730&forum_id=2id.#49429293) |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 1:04 AM Author: unholy iridescent degenerate it was all pretty ok until the new deal. frequent amendments ensured if the court fucked up congress could and would adjust. then instead of amending the constitution to permit the new deal policies we turned it into a creative writing exercise and now it's all completely made up.
my literal laugh out load moment was penumbral rights. now you're not even twisting the words on the page, you're making it up completely! |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 1:10 AM Author: soul-stirring painfully honest box office rigor Yeah the commerce clause nonsense is a goldmine.
“Hmm it looks like it says ‘Congress can regulate commerce between states’ but what they probably meant was congress can regulate anything that affects commerce in any way shape or form no matter how small because if you add it all together that activity will have some kind of effect on commerce so no you can’t grow your own wheat in your backyard to feed your own farm animals” |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 1:16 AM Author: unholy iridescent degenerate yeah wickard is definitely the point where any intellectually honest person has to admit "oh ok so they're just making stuff up to get to a result they want." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5797730&forum_id=2id.#49429301) |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 1:33 AM Author: Orange Fat Ankles Space how dare you deny the majesty of the law! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5797730&forum_id=2id.#49429311) |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 2:03 PM Author: soul-stirring painfully honest box office rigor (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5797730&forum_id=2id.#49430570) |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 2:06 PM Author: demanding pocket flask sanctuary Lol (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5797730&forum_id=2id.#49430579) |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 2:29 PM Author: Charcoal base This was obvious without going to law school. Lawyers won't just admit that they all decided the judges could "grease the skids" a bit since otherwise the constitution is too hard to deal with (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5797730&forum_id=2id.#49430635) |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 2:32 PM Author: unholy iridescent degenerate you sound like a non-lawyer. wtf do you mean "hard to deal with"? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5797730&forum_id=2id.#49430647) |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 2:43 PM Author: Charcoal base Too hard to amend. Instead of passing an amendment saying "Congress can regulate bros growing their own wheat for personal consumption" or "abortion is legal everywhere," they just have this tacit understanding that wise judges can come up with bullshit explanations to make are lives easier (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5797730&forum_id=2id.#49430674) |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 2:50 PM Author: soul-stirring painfully honest box office rigor Yes, to make our lives easier. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5797730&forum_id=2id.#49430699) |
|
Date: November 14th, 2025 2:59 PM Author: unholy iridescent degenerate that has nothing to do with the constitution per se, which was frequently amended for the first 150 years. it's because we deviated from how our system was supposed to work. and i don't think this is "obvious" to many 22 year olds. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5797730&forum_id=2id.#49430754) |