/r/badlegaladvice
When someone provides bad legal advice, relay it to us.
Any and all bad legal advice, commentary, interpretation, etc. is welcome.
From classics such as "Cops have to tell you the truth if you ask if they're a cop, or else it's entrapment," to "You can't tell me to shut up! I have free speech!" we will mock it all.
Badcademics Association Member
Some of our Cherished Doctrines
Another sub you may enjoy: ShittyAskALawyer
FOLLOW THESE SIMPLE RULES
Rule 0: The linked material has to involve bad legal advice or a misstatement of the law. It doesn't have to be an explicit misstatement of a particular law to be a misstatement of the law. A statement solely about what the law should be is not a statement of the law.
Rule 0a: The sub is for linking and analyzing badlegaladvice. It is not a vehicle for personal attacks against other users or people making badlegaladvice. Keep links and comments focused on discussing the badlegaladvice not personal attacks. Serious violations of this rule will result in content removal or potentially a ban.
Rule 1: No voting or commenting in linked threads. Thou shalt not vote in linked threads, and voting in linked threads shalt thou do not. Evidence of downvote or comment brigades will result in a warning, followed by deletion of the thread and/or ban for those involved.
Rule 1a: Although we can't physically restrain everyone from downvoting, please do your part to help prevent it, and ensure that all linked submissions use the non-participation format, i.e. 'np.reddit.com'.
Rule 2: Please remember to include a description of why the linked post is bad law. An explanation must be given within an hour that the post was made, otherwise it will be removed until an explanation is posted. Explanations are necessary even if the bad law seems obvious.
Rule 2a: If you link to an entire post you must point out more than one comment that is badlegal and give an explanation as to why those comments are badlegal. Simply linking to a post and saying "look at how bad all the comments are" is too lazy even for this sub.
Rule 3: Don't post links to your own internet arguments. This will be up to the mods' discretion. If you are engaged in a back and forth don't post it here. If you simply replied "no, that's wrong" you can still post it here. If you have any questions about whether a post is proper you can message the mods.
Rule 4: Internet comments are allowed as submissions only if they were posted on reddit or other forums. Do not link to the comment section of videos, articles, or similar pages.
Other, less horrible legal subs
The rest of the Badcademics Association
Honorary Members:
/r/badlegaladvice
49,614 Subscribers
It's legal for anyone to put up signs regulating parking on public streets
16:29 UTC
4th Amendment protections only exist if there's not a report of a missing kid somewhere
15:39 UTC
Reddit doesn't understand what a dutch appeals court means by 'clear risk' but yet they are outraged
14:46 UTC
Commenter thinks that maybe laws can be invalidated by trademarking the name of the law
16:02 UTC
“Attempted theft is not a crime”
https://np.reddit.com/r/legal/s/8vVbHpiBI7
R.2 - attempted theft is very much a crime.
In a comments section full of errors and terrible advice, I waded through the usual mistakes (no, you can’t “countersue” for attorneys fees because you won a case; no, perjury is not a tort and you can’t sue someone for committing perjury; no, lost wages for time spent litigating are not [generally] damages; no, you can’t sue someone for defamation based on their statements in court) to find this absolute gem.
The confident certainty with which they declare that “attempted theft is not a crime” is a spectacle to behold.
23:41 UTC
Always proofread twice to make sure you didn't any words out.
00:59 UTC
Reasonable Suspicion is the same as Probable Cause. Oh, and Exigent Circumstances also means the same thing as Probable Cause. You can never stop anyone without Probable Cause and everything is Probable Cause under the 4th Amendment.
15:39 UTC
Antiwork? More like anti-good-legal-advice.
18:15 UTC
Porn isn't speech, and 90% of porn is legally obscenity
20:17 UTC
Apparently a doctor giving medical advice to lose weight is guilty of assault courtesy to an idiot who posted accordingly on this featured post on r/fatlogic
That is your doctor looking out for you, not assault. Not even close. Asault is a threat of battery (unwanted touching.) Even in States that have redefined assault as attempted battery, no. Fun fact, California criminal assault is attempted battery, but civil lawsuit can use either the criminal definition or common law definition.
09:42 UTC
I know it's basically cheating, but...
15:21 UTC
The NFL changing rules for disciplinary hearings after the occurrence of punishable conduct would be an ex post facto law
21:52 UTC
a residential lease term limiting "how many guests [the tenant] can have over is unreasonable and probably isn’t enforceable"
22:13 UTC
"If you truly own the house, your best option is to kill them."
14:14 UTC
/r/whitepeopletwitter organizes mass capitol police calls against MTG re: Hunter Inquiry because "If enough people call, they have to do something."
13:58 UTC
If you license out your IP to someone, you have now lost the IP and anyone in the world is entitled to use your IP
15:09 UTC
Two pieces of bad law manage to cancel out regarding Creative LLC v. Elenis
20:05 UTC
Fire your criminal defense lawyer and sue your accuser!
R2: OP receives guidance to find a criminal defense attorney who will take the case on a contingent fee basis. Below, another respondent asserts that it is "illegal" to do criminal defense work on a contingent fee basis--at least in my jurisdiction it's not illegal, but it is a violation of the rules of professional conduct.
14:14 UTC
Getting fired for having sex with your boss's wife is unlawful retaliation. In fact, any retaliatory termination is illegal!
10:19 UTC
Landlords agent who has been hitting on you is able to lawfully enter your apartment at 1 am if they use a key.
23:36 UTC
It's not murder if you don't know who the victim is!
"Attempted murder requires specifically intending to kill a specific person. The other person didn't know who you were, so it can't be that."
01:14 UTC
Employee NDA with a private company violates the 1st Amendment
All commenters agree that confidentiality agreements are unenforceable because contracts with private parties must comply with federal law, such as free speech. This is bad legal advice because nearly all constitutional claims, including 1st amendment violations, require state action, and there is no indication that OP's employer is a government agent. The example related to employers banning workers from discussing salaries ignores that the basis for this rule is labor regulations, not the constitution. For a bonus, one commenter points out the lack of separate consideration for this particular contract term even though it's part of an overall trade of services for compensation. While it's possible the NDA would not be fully enforceable or would lack damages for OP's proposed conduct under a variety of arguments, this advice misses the mark.
14:01 UTC