Kate Jackson
banner
katejackson.bsky.social
Kate Jackson
@katejackson.bsky.social

Associate Professor of Law at a regional midwest public law school. Political theory, corps & admin. 🧶👽👾🧙🏽‍♀️🦅🎮 My views are my own and reposts are not endorsements.

SSRN author page
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=3568227 .. more

Political science 37%
Law 28%
“School officials have created a Microsoft Copilot prompt to review course descriptions with an eye toward avoiding ‘advocacy-oriented or prescriptive terms.’”

Terms: “dismantling, decolonizing, interrogating, challenging, centering, combating, liberation, resistance, activism, justice oriented”
To Root Out Wokeness in the Course Catalog, This Texas University Is Turning to AI
“The AI was upset with my use of the phrase ‘women's rights movement.’”
www.texasmonthly.com

This makes even more sense if you consider that giving folks permanent positions on the same court enables planning and strategy, the ability to plan and strategize is require for ideological movements - and all that is doing politics, not law.
Fix the Court, no amendment needed: Every circuit judge is now also a SCOTUS justice, and all current justices assigned to a circuit. SCOTUS cases heard by panels of 13, one judge from each circuit, selected randomly. Cert granted or denied by different random panels of 13.

So that huge new homeland security bill will also pay for defamation damages awesome
Sabrina Carpenter ratioed the White House after it used her song in an ICE video.

The WH deleted the post…but now it’s back with a new ICE video, this time using an altered clip from Carpenter’s SNL monologue.
Fix the Court, no amendment needed: Every circuit judge is now also a SCOTUS justice, and all current justices assigned to a circuit. SCOTUS cases heard by panels of 13, one judge from each circuit, selected randomly. Cert granted or denied by different random panels of 13.
Sabrina Carpenter ratioed the White House after it used her song in an ICE video.

The WH deleted the post…but now it’s back with a new ICE video, this time using an altered clip from Carpenter’s SNL monologue.

Quality controlled so well they can fire your partner without cancelling classes….? (My nightmare)

Clientelism? Neo-feudalism? Schmittian discretionism (vs rule of law)?

The overlap between Trump’s view of M&A (if it’s big, he will extract his pound of flesh using his veto power) and Silicon Valley’s (using dual-class shareholding to extract permissive legislative changes and board consent) cannot be an accident

And I believe that some companies (cough Musk cough cough) are purposely trying to do exactly the latter in order to shore up their control.

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
Corporate Populism: Musk's Challenge to the Rule of Law and Equity
<p>The success of Elon Musk and his companies defy received understanding. Tesla stock creeps upwards even as it suffers the kind of setbacks that would amount
papers.ssrn.com

this was a FAB panel at the recent ECGI conf (link below) The panelists discuss how Silicon Valley dual class s'holding turns both companies and legislatures into hostage situations - and explain how vulnerable Delaware is should corporate law politics start mapping onto nat'l culture war politics.

Because of course why would they provide an option for expert human input that might demand consideration for their valuable co tribulation

And, by the way, if you're a student - I wouldn't expect a discount if your classes are taught by Dr. Grok

Beau are you telling me that SCOTUS is likewise full of unaccountable, unelected bureaucrats that are even harder to fire than the head of the CFPB (RIP)??

I love the part where agencies only exist because congress is lazy and not because they are a thoughtful and deliberate institutional response to pressing public problems and power private actors

I cannot wait until people educated under this regime obtain economic and political power.

Ai will be available to soothe their consciences (if they have any left) after they see us all in the breadline

Reposted by Kate Jackson

This new documentary about single working class men in China is compelling. But it attributes their hardship to the shortage of men, explained only as: "[China's] one-child policy left it with over 30 million more men than women." A one-child policy by itself does not affect the sex ratio...
/1

Microsoft was given primo real estate in one of our newest, fanciest buildings to develop a bespoke “study buddy” chatbot and provide “free” instruction on how to develop and use their products. And even gave undergraduates (paid) internships.

They’re thirsty and it is working.

Reposted by Philip N. Cohen

I have a bad feeling about these university “partnerships” with AI companies who are, at this very moment, developing study-tutoring-chatbots just as schools move more classes online in the face of the demographic cliff.

academic layoffs are not gonna be for culture war reasons alone…

Reposted by Kate Jackson

This is a fascinating new experimental jurisprudence paper from Chris Jaeger on what is "reasonable."

For laypeople's judgments of reasonableness, the probability of harm (P) has an important effect beyond its role in the B
yalelawjournal.org/article/the-...
The Hand Formula’s Unequal Inputs | Yale Law Journal
Tort law’s famous Hand Formula does not align with how laypeople judge whether conduct is reasonable. Five original experiments demonstrate that the Hand...
yalelawjournal.org

And here’s Ohio - before what I presume is the immanent targeting of Somali migrants

More of the dehumanization of the sort that gives one permission to begin more formal extermination policies

Reposted by Kate Jackson

200,000 additional children under 5 will die this year — thanks to aid cuts
www.vox.com
200,000 additional children under 5 will die this year — thanks to aid cuts
twp.ai

Reposted by Kate Jackson

Made an interactive to explore state- and month-level data on ICE arrests. www.pbump.net/o/a-quick-an...

It’s just a theocracy that operates behind the scenes. We may begin to interpret (abstract) law not in terms of “we the people,” or “ordinary public meaning,” but with religious precepts in mind. Just like neoclassical economics disfigured corporate law.

In any event, the argument is that accepting religious reasons as legal justification is a kind of theocracy, or opens the door to one.

And democratic consensus itself is already pretty tenuous. Who amongst us doesn’t think, in their heart of hearts, that the “right” political choice is the one we believe in, not the one that’s popular.

You should see what folks did to habermas when he suggested that religious argument ought to be incorporated into democratic deliberation…. The tldr is that political philosophers fear “because god said so” will displace “democratic consensus” as the basis of legitimacy.
DOJ's newest recruitment ad features Judge Dredd, the comic satire about the dangers of lawless policing and authoritarian power