The Popehat Report

The Popehat Report is a newsletter focused on examining legal issues, free speech, and judicial proceedings with a critical lens on misinformation, media portrayal, and the impact of legal decisions on societal integrity. It delves into specific high-profile cases, general legal principles, and the importance of clear, open communication about mental health.

Legal Analysis and Critique Free Speech and First Amendment Rights Media Misinformation and Disinformation Mental Health Awareness Judicial Proceedings and High-Profile Cases Government and Public Policy Cultural and Societal Issues

The hottest Substack posts of The Popehat Report

And their main takeaways
4611 implied HN points β€’ 30 Jan 24
  1. The Popehat Report is moving to Beehiiv, a different platform for blogs and newsletters.
  2. Ken White made the decision to switch platforms for several reasons, including the opportunity for design changes and a more 'bloggy' feel.
  3. The new platform will allow for easy subscription management and Ken White will still be present on Substack as a co-host on Serious Trouble.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:
8456 implied HN points β€’ 10 Jun 23
  1. The law is full of no-win scenarios that good lawyers navigate by preparing, advocating, and fighting for clients.
  2. Charging Trump despite political challenges shows adherence to the rule of law and the importance of justice.
  3. Prosecuting powerful individuals upholds equality before the law, prevents abuse of the legal system, and maintains societal integrity.
6158 implied HN points β€’ 26 Jul 23
  1. The urge to comment immediately on events before having all the facts is prevalent in the age of social media.
  2. The failure to define the scope of non-prosecution promises in agreements led to the derailment of Hunter Biden's plea deal.
  3. The set of agreements in Hunter Biden's case were vaguely drafted, raising concerns about clarity and potential future issues.
4350 implied HN points β€’ 13 Jun 23
  1. Recusal law may not work how you expect, it has specific criteria for judges to disqualify themselves.
  2. Federal courts interpret recusal statutes narrowly, focusing on objective criteria rather than subjective views.
  3. Motions to recuse judges are rarely granted based on their conduct in a case; usually require evidence of bias from an extrajudicial source.
3630 implied HN points β€’ 27 Apr 23
  1. American society is diverse and faces challenges in applying legal standards like the reasonable person test across different cultures.
  2. Cultural context plays a significant role in determining what constitutes a true threat in First Amendment cases.
  3. To strike a balance between free speech and protection from threats, considering the intended audience's cultural context in true threats analysis could be a valuable approach.
4105 implied HN points β€’ 03 Apr 23
  1. Dumb defamation threat letters can lead to practical censorship of free speech.
  2. Non-public threats of litigation can intimidate individuals from exercising their rights.
  3. Efforts are needed to educate the public about free speech rights, provide accessible resources, and encourage legal support to protect speech.