Birdwatch Note
2024-06-08 03:55:21 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
This is not what the court said. The appeals court did not rule COVID vaccines are not vaccines. The ruling does not prevent LAUSD from mandating COVID vaccines in the future. The court vacated the district court’s order and remanded the case for further proceedings https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/22-55908/22-55908-2024-06-07.html
Written by F735563C1D6CACAE98B239A5BF3B6B29334E5A32093D655B66C4A4A96408409D
Participant Details
Original Tweet
Tweet embedding is no longer reliably available, due to the platform's instability (in terms of both technology and policy). If the Tweet still exists, you can view it here: https://twitter.com/foo_bar/status/1799239687036702872
Please note, though, that you may need to have your own Twitter account to access that page. I am currently exploring options for archiving Tweet data in a post-API context.
All Information
- ID - 1799289084088561992
- noteId - 1799289084088561992
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - F735563C1D6CACAE98B239A5BF3B6B29334E5A32093D655B66C4A4A96408409D Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1717818921475
- tweetId - 1799239687036702872
- classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 1
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 1
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 0
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
- trustworthySources - 1
- summary
- This is not what the court said. The appeals court did not rule COVID vaccines are not vaccines. The ruling does not prevent LAUSD from mandating COVID vaccines in the future. The court vacated the district court’s order and remanded the case for further proceedings https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/22-55908/22-55908-2024-06-07.html
Note Status History
| createdAt | timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus | firstNonNMRStatus | timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus | currentStatus | timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus | mostRecentNonNMRStatus | participantId |
| 2024-06-08 03:55:21 UTC (1717818921475) |
2024-06-08 07:52:01 UTC (1717833121067) |
CURRENTLY_RATED_HELPFUL | 2024-06-11 02:27:24 UTC (1718072844058) |
CURRENTLY_RATED_HELPFUL | 2024-06-08 07:52:01 UTC (1717833121067) |
CURRENTLY_RATED_HELPFUL |
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2024-06-08 02:27:13 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 02:00:36 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 01:03:59 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 00:44:24 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 00:39:41 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 00:23:13 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 00:12:55 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 00:04:27 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-07 23:14:23 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 09:39:50 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 00:06:50 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 00:03:26 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-07 23:56:40 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-07 23:50:32 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-07 23:42:52 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-11 03:51:46 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 12:24:49 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 02:06:46 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 01:37:03 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-08 00:40:13 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-07 23:36:23 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-07 23:13:38 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-06-07 23:12:23 -0500 | Rating Details |