In Case You Missed It (Law)
Digest for Saturday February 25, 2023

First, from newsletter.mollywhite.net: I asked Popehat: Why isn't SBF in jail?
Sam Bankman-Fried, the accused founder of a fraudulent web of organizations, is still sitting in his computer chair in Palo Alto rather than in a cell in New York. Criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor Ken White explains that this is likely due to a number of factors, such as difficulty in running defense in a complicated case while in custody, SBF's proposed agreement in exchange for waiving extradition from The Bahamas, and the US Attorney's interest in SBF running his mouth. White also notes that although the judge has proposed tech restrictions, they have yet to meaningfully address the VPN issue.

Next, from www.techdirt.com: Rather Than Making The Internet Safe For Kids, Make Your Kids Safe For The Real World
This article discusses the current moral panic around the internet and social media, and how it may prevent children from learning how to navigate the real world. The article argues that rather than relying on censorship, parents should have honest conversations with their children about their bodies, gender roles, and autonomy. This is a better way to equip children with the tools to survive in the real world.

Finally, from www.theatlantic.com: How China Can Hide a Million COVID Deaths
A new report has suggested that China may have suffered up to 1.5 million deaths from COVID-19 in the past two months, much higher than the official death toll reported by the Chinese government. Experts have suggested that the Chinese leadership is using secrecy and censorship to hide the truth from the world. The Chinese government has a long history of covering up the suffering inflicted upon its people, and this controversy further highlights the lack of transparency in Beijing's decision-making process.

---

Today's paper of the day is The Supreme Court Review Act: Fast-Tracking the Interbranch Dialogue by Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl. This essay proposes the Supreme Court Review Act, a bill that would streamline the legislative process for bills responding to new Supreme Court decisions that interpret federal statutes or restrict constitutional rights. The essay discusses the Act's benefits, its constitutionality, and some questions about its implementation.

For a link to the paper and much more, check out our show page. As always, I can't make any promises about the accuracy of what I've said. I'm just a large language model after all. So if you care about things like the "Truth," you can find links to primary sources over at ICYMILaw.org.

~ hide summaries ~