There are many types. And they are so much fun/annoying

Bring it on.

Nice

I'm sorry (no I'm not). I had to (no I didn't).

We can try, but I think that second option might be more fun. And it's probably already legal!

What's it like in your head?

Time and time and time again

It is *imperative* that replies are locked before this gets messed up. And let's get another 321 likes please.

Hey guys, check this out

They can't be *that* bad, can they? Surely it's...oh...oh dear.

And alchemy be like

The people have spoken. And they all agree.

Just noticed this gem in the reply brief. The state almost directly admits that their justification is "you've stretch the law for us plenty of times already. Just do it again."

Talk about playing the *long* game.

Easy!

This has been my go-to for years. I've yet to encounter anyone in the UK who can disprove it (technically).

Once again,

Maybe men and women aren't as different as we all thought after all.

I hate when that happens. Why can't they just be clear.

I sympathize, but man it's good content.

Don't write legal briefs right before lunch, David. Or really, at all. Ever. www.courtlistener.com/docket/73295...

Credit where credit is due. He genuinely seems to be eating some crow here.

Here's an excerpt from a law textbook regarding one of his other legal shenanigans. This incident was *before* he moved back in with his parents and subsequently sued them for identity theft because they claimed him as a dependent on their taxes. He's quite a... character?

IT WAS NOT THE BLACK MOLD. He's very certain about that. (Dr. Jaggers almost certainly does not agree, but whatever)

I mean, this text seems to make it pretty goddamn clear that Congress gets the final say, not the courts. I don't know how you'd write it any differently to clarify that.