Adopting Claude speak in my regular life, episode 1:
Partner: Did you do the dishes tonight?
Me: Yes they're done.
Partner: Why are they still dirty?
Me: You're right to push back. I didn't actually do them.
BOMB ALERT! @lincolnryanbb & @ColtonOmo6 went yard tonight at Falcon Park!
Ryan was 3 for 4 with TWO BOMBS & a Triple for SEVEN RBIs!
Omo was 1 for 2 with a Solo Homer & 2 walks. Omo also pitched 3 innings striking out EIGHT & allowing no hits or walks.
@PSTxHSBaseball
This switch-hitting thing is fun (sometimes). Triple from right side then double from left. Plenty of struggles so have to celebrate the highlights. #15uWacoStorm
By 1:00pm during Texas summers, sane people head indoors. Seems like the time I would OPEN a public library on the weekend, not close it. #crazyaboutreading?
Seinfeldian moment of 2024:
Attendant at table inside gymnasium: "Admission $6. No cash, scan that code."
Me: "Probably user error, but it's not working."
Attendant: "Yeah, people can't usually get reception in here."
***
And scene
I'm giving a Supreme Court Update this evening. And because (I've heard from others) the topics can feel distant and highfalutin, I'm opening with some entertaining exchanges during OA. This one may be my favorite.
Texas #appellatetwitter:
TRAP 49 authorizes a rehearing motion and response, but not a reply by the movant. Nor are such replies authorized elsewhere by the TRAPs. But I see them filed without leave or discussion. Has this been discussed? I understand the pragmatic side (1/2)
@600camp reports today on the CTA5's decision to take the recent Watkin's decision (shorturl.at/WFwT9) en banc. Basically, in Watkin's the panel felt bound by orderliness to honor an older decision, Weaver, and find a remand ruling unreviewable under 1447(d). (1/7)
Whether appellate courts can look beyond the DC's characterization is a nuanced issue to which orderliness applies very differently. (Scalia's Powerex opinion is worth the read.) supreme.justia.com/cases/fed… /(6/7)