CANRA specifies that "Except as provided in subdivision (d), and in Section 11166.05, a mandated reporter shall make a report to an agency specified in Section 11165.9 whenever the mandated reporter, in the mandated reporter’s professional capacity or within the scope of the mandated reporter’s employment, has knowledge of or observes a child whom the mandated reporter knows or reasonably suspects has been the victim of child abuse or neglect."

Lets say a police officer is off duty, and he find outs that someone might be neglecting or abusing their child, it seems that since the officer learned of this while off duty and not in their scope of employment, they have zero obligation to report it. But, if the officer then goes on duty, and while on duty, has a thought/recalls the incident or information they obtained while off duty, does this now mean the officer has a obligation to report the suspected abuse and/or neglect since they are aware of it while on duty and/or within their scope of practice?

Posted in the Seattle subreddit. Would any of this be illegal to do/get you arrested?

Tips for white folks - ICE

WHAT TO DO AT AN ICE CHECKPOINT, ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE WHITE and/or FEEL THE NEED TO JAM UP THE WORKS. Here's the deal:

🔘 Border Patrol can verify citizenship within 100 miles of a border or "external boundary." This includes coastlines, so NYC, Philadelphia, and all of NJ are within the 100-mile zone.

🔘 Border patrol can only ask brief questions about citizenship, and they cannot hold you for an extended time without cause.

🔘 You always have the right to remain silent. You do not need to answer their questions.

🔘 WITH THAT SAID, IF YOU ARE A BORN CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES AND ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE WHITE, YOU NEED TO SPEAK UP.

🔘 The most important acts of resistance are the small ones. Make it difficult and uncomfortable for ICE agents to do their jobs. They are counting on citizens to turn a blind eye and allow them to deport undocumented citizens without challenge. Disabuse of that notion.

🔘 If you are on a train, bus, or anything else and ICE or CBP boards, you need to stand up and loudly let everyone know that they have the right to remain silent or only answer questions in the presence of an attorney, no matter their citizenship or immigration status. There have been numerous reports that confronting the agents in this way has caused them to leave without verifying citizenship. THIS CAN SAVE LIVES. 🙌

🔘 If you see anyone being held up by immigration, loudly ask if they are being detained and if they are free to go.

🔘 Immigration officers cannot detain anyone without reasonable suspicion, an agent must have specific facts about you that make it reasonable to believe you are committing or committed, a violation of immigration law or federal law. If an agent detains you, you can ask for their basis for reasonable suspicion, and they should tell you.

🔘 Always say no to a search and let everyone know that they can and should refuse consent to a search.

🔘 They cannot search or arrest anyone without facts about that make it probable that they are committing, or committed, a violation of immigration law or federal law.

🔘 Silence alone meets neither of these standards. Nor does race or ethnicity alone suffice for either probable cause or reasonable suspicion

🔘 white citizens, you have a level of privilege which protects you from retaliation from ICE for being "rude" and making a scene, which makes it your DUTY to speak up and make sure people without the same privilege know their rights. GET LOUD. YELL. YELL IN SPANISH IF YOU KNOW IT. LET PEOPLE KNOW THEY DON'T HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING. MAKE ICE UNCOMFORTABLE. THROW SAND IN THE GEARS OF WHITE SUPREMACY.

⭐️ Bonus info ⭐️ 🔘It is perfectly legal to record immigration agents as long as you are not on government property or at a port of entry. If your train/bus gets boarded, pull your phone out and start videotaping immediately.

🔘 If you are detained or see someone getting detained, get the agent's name, number, and any other identifying information. Get it on video if possible.

🔘 Contact the ACLU or your local Immigrant/Migrant support orgs (Rapid Response Network if you're in CO - 1-844-864-8341) if you see someone's rights being violated. (this has been copy and pasted)

It seemed like she had a really strong case. The "Zoë post" strongly implied she exchanged sex with a journalist for a positive review. There was no review and no article. The lie caused very severe damages. Everyone who profited from the lie might have owed her something.

Why not:

1. Sue the ex boyfriend in the US
2. Sue Milo Yiannopoulos and Carl Benjamin in the UK where it's more claimant friendly

For context see Gamergate (Wikipedia).

EDIT: ZOË TIBERIUS QUINN vs. ERON GJONI abuse prevention order "ordered Gjoni not to abuse or contact Quinn, and to stay away from her residence and workplace" and "no posting". Eron Gjoni has since been charged with violating this restraining order at least four times.

I'm doing a presentation about the Jacob Lopez Madrid incident in 2015 where Airbnb refused to give his mother the address of the rental, and I'm wondering if they did that because of possible legal issues. I know hotels can't give out information about their guests, so I was wondering if there were any laws pertaining to Airbnb.

For example, I see a lot of people on Etsy and other places making art with the quote from Beetlejuice "I Myself Am Strange and Unusual" some are as simple as a shirt with the words quoted on it and no fancy design so I'd like to know if this is even legal since it's not transformative and if so what makes it legal? I have made hand painted art with quotes on it but I've only given as gifts or upon specific request because I'm terrified to try and sell something that could infringe on copyright/IP. This is something I would really love to sell and I know people are doing it but I don't want to sell something that could get my future shop flagged or taken down. My focus would be more on quotes from people's books, lectures, podcasts/ YouTube Videos, interviews or song lyrics more so than movies.

I've also seen people use images that look like they took a still straight from a movie and for example, put that image onto a pillowcase without altering the image in any way, I don't see how that could fall under fair use, or does it?

Thanks in advance for any help, I've been searching for answers on this for a couple years but never thought to just... ask on reddit 😅

The judge should follow the law, but if he thinks that his view on law might lead to result that can hurt a lot of people, should that play a role in how he acts? If that influences his decisions, is that betraying his oath to follow the law or not? I am conservative, but I am closer to the view that it should have at least some impact, I think that is what led to Justice Roberts, not a liberal man by any means, upholding AFA which today has an approvable rating of 64% according to polls. What do you think?

For example wwe is having a premium live event tomorrow night , and Indiana pacers star Tyrese Haliburton will be there cause it’ll be in Indianapolis . Let’s say wwe scripted to have him physically get involved in some way , and Tyrese gets hurt . Could the Indiana pacers sue wwe for doing that ?

I had an idea.

A non profit search and rescue company that truly is the first to respond. I get that everybody would need training but, is it legal to fight fires and help the government in something like the current ongoing events such as the plane crashes and the LA fires.

Would multiple witnesses be enough?

So I need a lawyer, and after the local Bar number didn't answer, I started to STFW for local attorneys practicing in my required field, or similar.

I notice several say they are attorneys at law. Why that particular phrase? What is the history behind it? Are there other kinds of attorneys? Or is it something like "esquire"?

Are there any laws against communicating with an inmate, or allowing minors to do so? What if the inmate has to register as a sex offender?

All communication would be done through the proper channels. There would be no secret cell phones, nothing sneaky, and nothing inappropriate. The means of communication would be exchanging mail, or using the phone and message services provided by the facility. Conversations would be casual in nature; greetings, news of the family, and the like.

Is it possible to lose your job, have your kids taken away, or have criminal charges filed against you for that?

Edit: This is in the United States

I'd like to find out more about the subject in the title and hope someone can help.

I'm pretty savvy on dealing with police and rights. Let's say I'm on the street with my wife, son or even a friend. If we are stopped, questioned and detained by the police, can I tell the police that I'm representing my wife, son or friends and tell my peers to stay quiet?

Do I have any ground to step in and act on their behalf if the police try to separate us, or even if they keep us together?

While watching a dipshit pull into their driveway way too fast and almost crash into their garage door, I had this thought.

Let's say I drive my car into my house and cause injury to myself. I have full coverage car insurance, homeowners insurance and health insurance. I own the house. I own the car. I own my body.

The car was totaled because I crashed it into my house. The whole front wall of the house is destroyed. And I broke my leg in the process. I've got all the insurances. Who is paying for what?

We'll say this happened in NY because that's where I live.

Im specifically thinking about Fogbank, a material used in nuclear bombs that’s role, composition, and production is so classified that we forgot how to make it.

If you were to use the publicly available information on fogbank to try and reverse engineer what it is, would that be illegal?

You technically aren’t accessing or disseminating any documents that you aren’t allowed to view so I assume it’s not technically illegal. But I feel like the government still wouldn’t be happy if you independently discovered some piece of classified technology.

Say a news organization doesn't perform their due diligence and either the source was wrong or knowingly provided false information. The news organization is sued and loses for not adequately validating this information. Can they then sue their source for damages? NY state.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act legalized most undocumented immigrants who had arrived in the country prior to January 1, 1984. The act altered U.S. immigration law by making it illegal to knowingly hire undocumented immigrants, and establishing financial and other penalties for companies that employed undocumented immigrants. Nearly three million people applied for legalization under the IRCA.[1] Through the update in the registry date along with the LAW and SAW programs enacted by IRCA, approximately 2.7 million people were ultimately approved for permanent residence.

So let’s say someone crossed the border illegally before January 1, 1984. He has been living a shameless life ever since but he just slept over this important date. Is there a legal path for him to get a citizenship?

Thanks,

if you haven’t seen the show, Jeff Winger basically faked his law degree and worked at a law firm as a lawyer, and when his bosses found out they fired him. he went on to go to community college, without legal consequences at all

in real life, i’d assume he’d go to jail for fraud or something?

i don’t have a concrete design doc for it and it’s just a written mess of ideas and UI concepts so it’s mostly a hypothetical.

i have this idea for a game that really simulates being an actual cog in the political machine. mostly just systems and like core mechanics. my big idea is a set timeline of scenarios that all mirror American government history. e.g the gulf war, 9/11, the patriot act, the GWOT, citizens united vs the Supreme Court, etc. mostly the 90s - 2010s.

I’d really love to depict actual public figures that held office in these periods. this would be begging to get a suit but my 2 main remedies would be only using publicly available information and depicting them as blandly and neoliberal as possible or leaving controversial information about them hidden and up to the player’s knowledge of them. i’d also like to implement a system where more vocal or prominent figures are more vocal and have more opinionated actions, along with making processes and bills and such have a bit of randomness. e.g. mirroring real world legislation and orders but varied everytime they pop up for fun’s sake. is this stupid?

I was just curious, the ada states that service animals must be accommodated in a place of business and people with allergies must also be accommodated if possible by placing them in separate areas.

My question is, in many vehicles, that's practically impossible. Aside from larger vehicles like vans,suvs,and the like.

Also due to the nature of vehicles being in motion, allergies can cause a number of variables that can end in harm or even death.

Medications also can cause a hazard.

I've seen that some states have a section that refers to cars,yet they just refer back to the ADA.

Anyone have any advice or insights?

How much trouble could one get in if a job was accepted while one disability but a time when payments stopped, then quick said job before payments started again?

Cross posting from r/antiwork

My mom works as a teacher in our local public school district. Lately their union has really been struggling to secure a good contract. She asked their representative about their right to strike, and their representative said that years ago it was added to their contract that they cannot strike.

Can they… legally do that? Doesn’t the national labor board state that workers have a right to strike if they’re working under unfair working conditions? And since they’re negotiating a new contract, that means the old one is set to expire - so would it still stand if the contract expires?

I do also wanna add that the board has already breached the contract by not giving proper pay raises anyway.

Edit: I’m thinking how to deal with jury bias, like especially if the news went REALLY viral, like front page on news/social media and tons of people saw it. Like yeah you can exclude the evidence, but how do you deal with the jury pool being biased by having seen it?

Like they leaked a recording of them meeting with the defendant where the defendant admitted what they did fully/laid out the case supporting it, and the lawyer goes “my client is guilty I can’t defend them they are so awful.” Think like a murder case.

I know the lawyer will get in massive trouble, disbarred, fines, prison, etc.

What happens to the defendants murder case if their lawyer broke attorney-client privilege to leak a recorded conversation showing the client detailing the murder and admitting to it?

I’m more curious about the defendant. Like the lawyer

Hi, I’m writing a book where a character, who’s extremely rich, is charged with an aggravated DUI with a .09% BAC, in Evanston, IL, but resulted in a boy dying in the other car and his wife in his.

i need a realistic treatment of someone with means going through the system, from booking, through arraignment and civil case. He’s not the most lovable guy, but loved his wife. The mother of the other boy was a single mother, with him being her only child.

can anyone help?

Is it illegal to use a voice generation tool to narrate and turn a sexual text or story into audio if the voice is that of a small child?

President Trump has made a number of decisions with intent likely to get them to SCOTUS, which in recent years has been quite friendly to power of US President( Selia law, Collins, Trump v United States) and expend the power of the president.

He has a fired labor relations board member who, like several other agencies such as SEC, had for for-cause protection from being removed by the President:

https://reason.com/volokh/2025/01/29/is-humphreys-executor-in-the-crosshairs/

The plan here is likely to get it to SCOTUS and try to at least narrow Humphrey's Executor if not overturn it, expanding on Selia law that held that Congress cannot prevent the president from removing heads of agencies headed by a single director(such as Social Security or FBI). Justice Thomas wrote a concurrence (joined by Gorsuch ) in Seila Law where he expressed a desire to overturn Humphrey and expend that to the President also being able to remove leadership of agencies headed by bipartisan boards at will.

The second case is spending, how much control the President has over spending approved by congress, Presidents historically for about 200 years had quite a bit of control until a law Congress passed in 70s after the Nixons administration(ability of president to have autonomy with sending was something that for long time both democratic and republican presidents supported, such as FDR and Bill Clinton and even Obama), a law which Ross Vought argues is unconstitutional, but SCOTUS itself has not broadly clarified the issue.

And third case, is birthright citizenship, an interpretation of the 14th Amendment. I would appreciate comments that are not just " Trump owns SCOTUS" as even though Court is conservative, they have ruled against Trump number of times.

When I was a teenager, I used to go to an evangelical church. Now, as an adult, I want to write a book about my experience and the horrible people there. Obviously, some things will be very exaggerated for the story, and I want to use their real names—people need to know these are real people.

The popular MTV show "Punk'd" hosted by Ashton Kutcher would often prank random celebrities just to get their reactions on hidden camera.

There is one segment where a valet, who is an actor, literally crashes Adrian Brody's sedan into multiple vehicles in a lot. Can't Adrian Brody sue for tort damages to his property regardless of the fact they tell him at the end "it's just a prank." I'm sure the show paid him for any damages to his car, but can't a celebrity hypothetically sue for emotional distress for putting them through that?

Also, what would happen if one of said celebrities did something like cause a car crash or greater accident that wasn't scripted in the show as a result of the prank. Aren't the show producers now liable for those damages, even if it just started out as a prank?

Edit: just rewatched the clip, and it turns out he wasn't driving Adrian Brody's personal car but was just blocking the parking lot with a random sedan. There is a segment where Tyler Posey's car actually gets damaged in a drive-through though.